Handy little video on subcultures

http://www.moletv.org.uk/watch.aspx?v=QZCSU

Published in: on April 8, 2010 at 8:14 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Matza techniques of neutralisation in 1 easy diagram :)

Click on the diagram to make it bigger!

Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:54 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Matza- a criticism of subcultural theory

Matza

•One consistant criticism of subcultural theories was that there was little evidence to demonstrate a distinct set of anti social values.

•Matza argued that there were no distinctive subcultural values –but all groups in society shared a set of Subterranean values.

•The key thing was that most of the time individuals control their deviant desires- they only rarely emerge eg- at the office party or on holiday in Ibizia.

•But when they do emerge we use techniques of neutralisation to provide justification for our deviant actions.

•He is basically saying that all of us share deviant ‘subcultural values’ and that it is not true that there are groups with their own values different from the rest of us.

Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:49 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: , ,

Cloward and Ohlin in one handy diagram :)

Click on the diagram to make it bigger!

Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:24 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Albert Cohen in one handy diagram :)

Click on the diagram to make it bigger!

Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:22 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Subcultural Theory- Quick notes on what the 3 key thinkers had to say

Cohen (1955)

The structural origins of crime & deviance

Cohen accepts much of what Merton had to say on the structural origins of crime and deviance.

  • Working class youths internalise mainstream norms and values through socialisation.
  • Working class youths face blocked opportunities (e.g. at school) because of their position in the social class structure.
  • Working class youths as a whole (groups not just individuals) suffer from status frustration (realise that they can not achieve in middle class terms).

The cultural causes of crime & deviance

 Cohen extends Merton’s theory by incorporating a strong cultural element in his explanation.

  • Some working class youths make a decision to completely reject mainstream norms and values.  This is because of the status frustration they feel.
  • Mainstream norms and values are replaced with alternative delinquent subcultural norms and values.  For Cohen a high value is placed on non-financial negativistic delinquent acts.  For example, joy riding, arson and vandalism.
  • The delinquent subculture provides an alternative means of gaining status and striking back at an unequal social system that has branded them as ‘failures’
 

Cloward and Ohlin (1961)

The structural origins of crime & deviance

Cloward and Ohlin accept Cohen’s views on the structural origins of crime and deviance. 

 The cultural causes of crime & deviance

However, Cloward and Ohlin criticise Cohen’s cultural explanation of crime.  In particular, his failure to explain the variety of subcultural forms that emerge out of the social structure.

  • Cloward and Ohlin maintain that the form working class delinquent subcultures take depends on access to criminal networks.
  • Criminal subcultures emerge when working class youths have access to criminal networks.  The focus of their deviance is on material crimes such as burglary.
  • Conflict subcultures emerge when working class youths lack access to criminal networks but live in an environment which values defence of territory and violence.  The focus of their deviance is gang related ‘warfare’
  • Retreatist subcultures emerge when working class youths are denied access to criminal or conflict subcultures.  The focus of their deviance is on alcohol and drug abuse.

Miller (1962)

The structural origins of crime & deviance

Miller rejects Cohen and Cloward and Ohlin’s views on the structural origins of crime and deviance.  He criticises the idea that delinquent subcultures emerge as a reaction to anomie.  This is because he believes that lower class youths never accept mainstream norms and values in the first place.  He therefore offers an alternative cultural view on crime and deviance.

The cultural causes of crime & deviance

  • Lower class youths are socialised into a set of lower class values or focal concerns.  These values include toughness, smartness, excitement and fatalism.
  • Some lower class youths over conform to lower class values because of a concern to gain status within their peer group.  In this situation crime and deviance follow.  Delinquency might include assault.
Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:13 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,

Subcultural theories of Crime & Deviance- a cheesy poem to help you remember the key thinkers!

ODE TO SUBCULTURAL THEORY

Now Wally was a subcultural man,

Focal concerns were his game plan.

He said that boys brought up without dad

Were much more likely to turn out bad.

No man at the top left a huge hollow,

No breadwinning role for the boys to follow.

A female-led household meant problems for them

They desperately needed to prove they were men.

To show they were ‘ard was their main aim,

And breaking the law was part of that game.

From danger and defiance they got their buzz,

Even tho’ this meant trouble with the local fuzz.

They put two fingers up at success at school

To be seen as a swot was very uncool.

Their focal concerns decided what would be,

Toughness, fate and autonomy.

 Now Alby Cohen wasn’t so sure,

The boys didn’t start off breaking the law.

Their goals were the same as everyone else,

Achievement at school and material wealth.

Like middle class boys they wanted success,

And  tried legitimately to do their best.

They soon realised this was not to be,

When their results came out, only one ‘E.’

Alby said they suffered from status frustration,

They coped with this by goal transformation.

They needed to get status elsewhere,

Flouting authority answered their prayer.

Mainstream goals they stood on their head,

So wrong became right and bad became good.

At petty crime they could well succeed,

Gathering in gangs and smoking the weed.

Now Cloward and Ohlin said ‘hang on a mo,’

Or as they’re known to their friends, Clo and Oh.

Why is it that some boys respond by stealing?

While others find fighting or drugs more appealing?

Or to use the language sociologists use,

Criminal, conflict, retreatist, which to choose?

If there’s a criminal network in the area they dwell,

They’ll more than likely join in as well.

If this structure’s lacking, they may join a gang,

To defend their turf, around the streets they’ll hang.

If both are missing, drugs they must choose,

And live in a subculture of spliffs and booze.

So, for subcultural theory, it’s Wally and Clo,

And to complete the line-up, Alby and Oh.

Other sociologists you could add to the list,

Like the CCCS and the New Left Realists.

But that’s another poem!

Published in: on February 19, 2010 at 8:02 pm  Leave a Comment  
Tags: ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.