labelling theory of crime and deviance

they are interested in how and why acts become labelled as criminal in the first place

* no act is inherently criminal or deviant, it only becomes so once when other people label it as such

it is no the nature of the act that makes it deviant, but the nature of society’s reaction to the act

what is the basic idea of labelling theorists?

Becker says that a deviant is someone who the label has been successfullly applied and deviant behaviour is simply behaviour that is labelled so

For Becker who is a deviant and what is deviant behaviour?

* the creation of a new group of outsiders- outlaws or deviants who break the new rules


* the creation or expansion of a social control agency (such as police, courts, probabtion officers ect) to enforce the rule and impose labels on offenders

labelling theorists look at how and why rules get made they are created by moral entrepreneurs, people who lead the moral crusade to change the law but Becker argues the new law has had two effects what are they?

the idea of ‘juvenile deliquency’ was originally created as a result of campaigns by upper class Victorian moral entrepreneurs, aimed at protecting young people at risk

* a new group is created, juvieniles

this has allowed the state to extend its powers beyond criminal offences, involving the young, into so-called ‘status offences’ such as truancy

* the state has expanded its power

Platt (1969) proving the two points above

the made the use of marijuana illegal 1937

they said it was becuase of the illuse and its effect on the young people

but Becker argues it was just becuase they wanted to expand their sphere of influence

its not the inherent harmfullness of a paticular drug but rather the efforts of power individuals and groups to redefine that behaviour as unacceptable

* marjuana use was not seen as harmful until this point!

Becker US federal Bureau of Narcotics?

not everyone who commits a crime gets arrested, this depends on

* their interactions with agencies of social control
* their apperance, background and personal biography
* the situation and circumstances of the offence

Who gets labelled?

==**Piliavian and Briar,**==

* police decisions to arrest a youth were mainly based on physical cues from which they made based on gender, class and ethnicity and time and place


* if you were walking late in a criminal areas you ran a greater risk of being arrested

==**anti-social behaviour orders** ==

* this disproporiantly affected ethnic minorities

why are labelling theorists interested in the way laws are applied and enforced?

the decision to arrest are influenced by their stereotypes about offenders

Cicourel, says that there is typfications, their commonsense theories or stereotypes of what a delinquent is leads to them concentrating on a certain ‘type’

* this results in law enforcement showing a class bias, wc areas had more people that fitted their typification more closely
* this led to police patrol WC areas more intensivley, resulting in more arrests and confirming their stereotypes

Other agents of social control reinforce this bias

* probation officers held the commonsense theory that juvenile delinquency was caused by broken homes poverty and lax parenting
* they tended to see youths from such backgrounds more likely to commit crime in the future and less likely to support non-custodial sentences for them

this means tha justice is not fixed it is negotiated

* mc youths are arrested, they are less likely to be charged becuase his backgorund did not fit the typification but also becuase his parents were more likely to negotiate the success for them and becuase the dont come from ‘broken homes’ they were more likely to not get prosecuted

Cicourel, the negotiations of justice and the typifications, what does this actually mean?

Primary deviance acts that are not publicly labelled, they are carried out by a lot of people, but it often goes unnoticed      e.g., Fair dodging on the train or dropping litter (low level deviance)

\-        A moment of madness, so, society will not get labelled, and they will not see themselves as deviant (it is a one off)

Lemert Primary deviance?

some deviance is labelled.

secondary deviance is the result of societal reaction- that is of labelling

being caught and publically shamed, humiliated, shunned or excluded from normal society

Once an individual is lablled and comes to terms with it, this becomes his master status and this is the only way he sees himself

* he is no longer a father or colleuge he is a thief

thsi creates an identity crisis and one way to resolve this to accept the label and see themselves as a deviant

* a self fulfilling prophecy as they do things to act out their label
* this secondary acting our from trying to fulfil his status is what lemert calls secondary deviance

Lemert, Master status/ Secondary deviance?

secondary deviance is likely to provoke further hostile reactions from society and reinforce the deviant’s ‘outsider’ status. Again, this in turn may lead to more deviance and deviant career.

* an ex convict not getting hired becuase he is a convict
* this will lead him to join a deviant subculture that offers deviant career opportunities and role models, rewards deviant behaviour and confirms his deviant identity

deviant career?

hippy marihuana users in Notting Hill, the drug was just a part of their lifestyle

* primary deviance, the havent accepted a label yet

persecuation and the polices ‘crackdown’

* the hippies increasngly see themselves as outsiders (secondary deviance)

they retreat into closed group where the create deviant subcultures, they grow their hair longer and more ‘way out’ clothes

* kind of a deviant career becuase theyve retreated from society into their groups

so drugs become central to this group

Jock young (1971) example of secondary deviance and deviant career?

labelling theorists, labelling is not inevetiable, they cannot predict that eeveryone will accpet a label because they have free will

Downes and Rock (2003)?

the idea that the attempt to control deviance leads to more deviance/like young described with the Hippies

Drill music/moral panic

* 410’s music video ‘attempted shouldve been murder’
* by performing this song 410 weren’t technically engaged in an illegal act. The laws preventing inciting of violence only apply to specific acts, and this is not the case with this song.
* is turned into an illegal act for this specific band by the actions of the authorities
* The two artists were actually found guilty of breaking a criminal behaviour order
* this confirms the moral panic for people that those engaged in drill music are criminals (labelling them!) and directly connecting drill music to violent crimes
* these groups retreat into their subcultures, which encourgaes them to hate authority, which leads them to commit crimes
* a deviancy spiral
* social control leads to more deviance

\

deviance amplification spiral?

folk devils and their actions are ‘over-labelled’ and over exposed to their public which the oppositite of the dark figure in which crimes are hidden

folk devils vs the dark figure?

Triplett, an increasing tendency to see young offenders as evil and less tolerant of minor deviance

labelling theory has important policy implications

by decriminalising soft drugs, it will reduce the number of people with criminal convictions

labelling and the criminal justice system?

__**Braithwaite**__  

* A positive role in the labelling theory in the future identifies two labelling  

 

**Disintegrative shaming;** both crime and criminal is labelled as bad, ostracised form of society  

**Reintegrative shaming;** label the act but not the actor 

Recognise the bad act but provide an opportunity for the individual to earn back the trust  

Prevent negative labelling and therefore secondary deviance breaks the self-fulfilling prophecy  

 

__**Braithwaite**__**?**

* Shows that law is not fixed by constructed  
* Shows that law is enforced unevenly  
* Shows that society's attempts to control deviance can lead to deviance amplification  

Far too deterministic  

Labelling arguably provides the criminal ‘victim’ status which ignores the real victims of crime  

 

By assuming offenders passively accept labelling it ignores the fact that some people actively choose deviance (for status)  

Does not explain why people undertake primary deviance  

Implies that without labelling deviance wouldn’t exist but many are aware they are breaking social norms  

Marxism; fails to account for the origins of labelling and does not consider wider power structure

evaluation of labelling theory?