The labelling theory consists of the fact that external people for example higher middle class or forms of authority, labels other members in society as being criminals or being deviant. The labelling theory works like this: a form of authority or even common people instinctively have a stereotype or put certain members of society into certain categories therefore labelling people as being criminals or having deviant behaviour and therefore this makes the members of society being labelled, commit to a self fulfilling prophecy whereby they end up acting out what they have been pre-judged as. Interpretivists accept this concept is highly useful and valid as it is qualitative. However, positivists believe it is low in reliability and usefulness as data is not numerical and cannot be compared, or even that there is no data at all. Being a criminal or deviant could be seen to be a social construct and therefore this may mean that you could question what criminal activity is and whether this social construct is even right since it has been constructed by members of the society.
Article Analysis Moral Panics: Culture, Politics, and Social Construction Introduction: One might heard about threats, warnings and illegal actions that are influencing the society at their peak. No matter which culture an individual is belonged to, the thing that matters is the panic he has been influenced by, through various ways. Such panic is simply termed as moral panic and it has been the cause of cultural conflicts, social disturbances and political issues. Moral panic has been a hot topic of discussion that considered through several different perspectives; emphasizing on this aspect, various scholars and researchers have illustrated the society with the instances of social, culture and political problems and more specifically the moral panics. Cohen (1972) defined moral panic as societal threat whereas Furedi (1994) described moral panics as a threat to happiness and health.
The construction of social problems, by people or activist, have given rise to a false or exaggerated belief that cultural behavior or cultural groups give way to dangerously stereotyping that poses a threat to normal society. This “moral panic” is directly related to many contemporary issues such as terrorism, politics, and most importantly crime. Over the years “moral panic” has been perceived as threat to societies values or norms. In order for “moral panic” to thrive, it is first created by framers, sociologist or activists who use “moral panic” as means to justify there issues through a presumption of exaggeration and manipulation of statistics. This paper along with three articles, The Social Construction of Serial Homicide, Moral
It does however explain why some people or actions are described as deviant, and can help in understanding crime and deviance. According to item A labelling has changed the theoretical base for the study of criminals. Becker emphasises the significance of crime being a social construct; an action only becomes criminal or deviant once society has labelled it so, and that crime can be argued to be a social construction. He introduced the concept of a master label, referring to the label which a person is given which overrides all other labels. When a person is labelled as negatively, society tends to tend them as such, and this master label often becomes internalised, and then a self-fulfilling prophecy occurs.
It is useful for highlighting why, in the working class, those who cannot achieve in education, they then therefore suffer from status frustration and in this process turn to other people who also cannot achieve in this institution. Thus, explaining why deviance subcultures exist. This theory of status frustration is said to focus too much on utilitarian crime which is committed for material gain, but what it does not say much about is the explanation for why people commit non-utilitarian crimes like vandalism and assault. Cohen realised this and backed up this explanation by talking about alternative status hierarchy. When working class boys find that they cannot perform well in mainstream education, they look at the values of not only the education system, but the values in modern society and turn them upside down, by valuing the opposite.
This theory has empirical support. For example Morrison found the underclass are faced with blocked opportunities due to their position in the social structure. Crime is then commuted because of group feelings of resentment and revenge suggesting there is some validity in this theory. Cloward and Ohlin however critical Cohen for failing to recognise different types of crime that emerge out of the legitimate opportunity structure. Cloward and Ohlin's theory differs (as the source states) from Cohen's slightly: They state access to criminal networks shape subculture types.
Vushaj SOC 150-05 September 6, 2013 Writing assignment #1 Sociology is the study of society and social interaction. Sociology takes a broad approach at helping one understand how people interact in different societies. On the contrary, other social sciences look deeper into specific areas of society, rather than society as a whole. Classical sociologists Karl Marx, Emile Durkheim and Max Weber, each contributed to the scientific study of sociology. Marx believed that societies grew and changed due to struggles of different social classes.
Examine the role of access to opportunity structures in causing crime and deviance. Opportunity structures are seen to be one of the biggest factors that can lead to deviant behaviour or criminal activity such as stealing and selling drugs, an example of this would be a person not being successful in their education and unable to achieve socially approved goals by opportunity structures, this may result them to illegitimate opportunities such as crime so that they get what they want such as materialists things. Mertons strain theory helps explain this, he argues that people engage in deviant behaviour when they may become frustrated and stressed this often leads to criminal means of getting what they want by taking their anger out on someone else or also taking drugs to comfort them from their failure. Merton explains that there are two elements to this theory; Structural factors, which is society’s unequal opportunity structure and cultural factors, which is the strong emphasis on success goals and the weaker emphasis on using legitimate means to achieve them. Merton argues that deviant behaviour starts from the structure of society and because they are unable to gain something from socially approved goals by legitimate means.
In Crime and Punishment, Rodion Romanovich Raskolnikov is painted to be both an immoral and moral person throughout the book and the moral ambiguity seen in his character is a crucial element in proving the idea that human beings are a complex mix of good and evil, which is one of the novel’s main themes. Raskolnikov’s more “evil” side is obvious all through Crime and Punishment. Firstly, the murder itself is a clear representation of his immorality. Someone who is considered a “good” person by society would never commit such a heinous crime. Furthermore, his reasons and justifications for murdering the pawn broker lead the reader to believe rather strongly that Raskolnikov is indeed a “bad” person.
they believe in shared values and consensus in society and talk about the march of progress which is that everything is getting better. The founding father of sociology, Durkheim who is a functionalist tries to explain the causes and extent of deviance in society as well as Merton who puts forward his strain theory. Durkheim believed that crime is necessary, inevitable and functional for society so much that without it society wouldn’t function without a certain amount of crime. However, he does recognise that too much crime is bad for society and causes it to be dysfunctional and break down. He therefore says the amount of crime is the important factor.