Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The subculture of violence theory
Factors influencing deviant behaviour
Consequences of deviance in society
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The subculture of violence theory
Deviant Behavior is optional not to conform norms and does not come together with an outlook of prosperity groups of the society as a whole. However, the subculture violence theory is described to have people in these situations which are separated as they begin to believe the acts and values that are ordinary, or better-quality to all other views. A number of things are associated with deviant behavior and the subculture violence theory. Some examples include, no subculture can be completely different or absolutely in conflict with the society, the counter-norm is nonviolence, recognized and unrecognized collective reins that attempt to avoid or diminish deviance, and crime, the infringement of properly enacted the law, is official deviance while having an unofficial social violation.
According to the article, Subculture Theory: A Historical and Contemporary Assessment of the Concept for Understanding Deviance. It discusses how subculture violence and deviant behavior attracts interest in culture and the society because it have been theorized, which is not simply separated from, but also in disagreement to, the prevailing culture. In addition, this article states that the whole country of the United States deals with perception of the subculture violence theory that has been a main descriptive implement for sociology and criminology to understand deviant behavior (Blackman, 2014).
On the other hand, the subculture violence theory, can be compared and contrast with the strain theory because both theories pertain to deviant behavior. However, the subcultural violence theory is based on characteristic norms and morals that are shared by a group of citizens within the society and how they lead to deviant behavior. As f...
... middle of paper ...
... I found to explain the boost of poverty and homicide rates in the community as of today, are Merton’s strain theory and Shaw and McKay’s social disorganization theory. Merton’s strain theory distinguish that social structures have limited contact with the goal of achievement through lawful means. Shaw and McKay’s social disorganization theory discuss that a diluted family and the public bound citizens together, which affects the social control of the society.
In conclusion, the reason for me choosing the topic deviant behavior and the subculture violence theory because I wanted to explain and figure out why there is so much crime and violence taken place in the society. After reviewing and looking over many different empirical articles, I discover that there are a lot of them that discusses deviant behavior and the subculture violence theory. Deviant behavior is
Kennedy, Leslie and Stephen Baron, Routine Activities And A Subculture Of Violence: A Study Of Violence On The Street, Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 30 No. 1, Febuary 1993, pp. 88-112 (Journal)
The subculture of violence theory revolves around individuals using violent acts in need of survival. In this theory, people kill because one was living their lifestyle through violent acts as normal behavior. According to Thio, Taylor, and Schwartz they mention, “violent behavior is more effective than nonpoor families’ (Thio et al, 2013, p. 79). Most poor neighborhoods have higher chances of committing crimes, especially, knowing that the behavior of the actions is reflected towards survival. These behaviors can be reflected on the family, peers, and community aspects. Living in poor neighborhoods, can be scary when not knowing what type of violent act or individuals that live around one. For example; some individuals might be influenced with gangs or fall into the wrong crowd. Individuals, who choose violence, are influenced by the experience from these gang groups, peers, parents, or normal neighborhood behaviors. These individuals live through the violence acts to kill because this is the type of lifestyle they are living in. I believe that people are violent because they believe killing is an escape to get away from issues and own problems. Also, people might turn to killing because it’s the main solution for survival. For example; if one is being harassed, one might feel that violence could to a key factor to protect themselves in this type of
"Sociological Theories To Explain Deviance." Sociological Theories To Explain Deviance. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Dec. 2013. .
The movie The Boondock Saints provides an excellent example of positive deviance through innovation. The Social theory of deviance can easily explain the brothers’ actions. The movie can be used to study deviance as the brothers kill people who are mafia members, breaking the norms of society. Even though the acts they are committing are clearly illegal and deviant, the people of South Boston do not react in a negative way. Since the Social theory is very broad, it will be easier to look at the brother’s acts under three sub theories: Labeling, Conflict and Strain theories.
General Strain Theory was reinvented by Robert Agnew in 1992 and contributed a new perception to the present strain theory that was popularized a couple eras ago (Agnew, 1992). Classic strain theory is connected; first with Merton’s (1938), Cohen’s (1955) and Cloward and Ohlin’s (1960). Founded on Durkheim’s theory of anomie (1893), Merton industrialized his theory of deviancy inside a societal fundamental context. Merton’s interpretation on the topic is that goal-expectation inconsistencies, composed with social stratification generates strain between underprivileged societies in turn leading them to use any means necessary, such as criminal, in order to accomplish socially defined goals (Merton, 1938). Merton specified that deviance was a
Crime is an irrelevant concept as it is tied to the formal social control mechanism of the State; deviance is a concept that is owned by sociology thus our study should be the sociology of deviance, rather than criminology
Deviant behavior is sociologically defined as, when someone departs from the “norms”. Most of the time when someone says deviance they think against the law or acting out in a negative behavior. To sociologists it can be both positive and negative. While most crimes are deviant, they are not always. Norms can be classified into two categories, mores and folkways. Mores are informal rules that are not written; when mores are broken, they can have serious punishments and sanctions. Folkways are informal rules that are just expected to be followed, but have no real repercussions.
Goode, E 2006, 'IS THE DEVIANCE CONCEPT STILL RELEVANT TO SOCIOLOGY?', Sociological Spectrum, 26, 6, pp. 547-558, SocINDEX with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 June 2014.
The second is related to status and respect. This type of status can change even between subcultures and may result in crime in order to achieve this s...
Sociologists understand the concept of deviance in a variety of ways. It is the result of unsuccessful socialization, the solutions are usually intended to change the mind of the individual, and that order needs to remain maintained. Norms determine whether something is deviant or normal. So deviance depends on the social status and power of the person, the social context in which the behavior occurs, and the historical place it takes place in. Deviance is all about violating the day to day norms and is usually considered to be wrong, bad, or immoral.
Before the 1950’s theorists focused on what the difference was between deviants and criminals from “normal” citizens. In the 1950’s researchers were more involved exploring meaning and reasons behind deviant acts. This led to the most dominant question in the field of deviance, “what is the structural and culture factors that lead to deviant behavior?” This question is important when studying deviance because there is no clear answer, everyone sees deviance in different ways, and how deviance is created. Short and Meier states that in the 1960’s there was another shift in focus on the subject of deviance. The focus was what causes deviance, the study of reactions to deviance, and the study of rule breaking and rule making. In the 1960’s society was starting to speak out on what they believed should be a rule and what should not; this movement create chaos in the streets. However, it gave us a glimpse into what makes people become deviant, in the case it was the Vietnam War and the government. Short and Meier also write about the three levels that might help us understand were deviance comes from and how people interact to deviance. The first is the micro level, which emphasizes individual characteristics by biological, psychological, and social sciences. The second level is macrosociological that explains culture and
Therefore, the community has informal social control, or the connection between social organization and crime. Some of the helpful factors to a community can be informal surveillance, movement-governing rules, and direct intervention. They also contain unity, structure, and integration. All of these qualities are proven to improve crime rate. Socially disorganized communities lack those qualities. According to our lecture, “characteristics such as poverty, residential mobility, and racial/ethnic heterogeneity contribute to social disorganization.” A major example would be when a community has weak social ties. This can be caused from a lack of resources needed to help others, such as single-parent families or poor families. These weak social ties cause social disorganization, which then leads higher levels of crime. According to Seigel, Social disorganization theory concentrates on the circumstances in the inner city that affect crimes. These circumstances include the deterioration of the neighborhoods, the lack of social control, gangs and other groups who violate the law, and the opposing social values within these neighborhoods (Siegel,
Deviance is the violation of cultural norms. Deviance falls into two forms: formal and informal. Formal deviance is the violation of laws in a society, resulting in crime. Informal deviance is the violation of a social norm. This is an action not acceptable by society, but cannot be punishable by law. In order to understand deviance, one must examine why individuals are deviant and what function deviance serves in society. However, there is not a definite answer for either, rather multiple theories.
3.subculture theory: some of the cultures value different cultures. the exclamation of crime posit the existence of group values that supports criminal
Strain theories of criminal behaviour have been amongst the most important and influential in the field of criminology. Taking a societal approach, strain theories have sought to explain deficiencies in social structure that lead individuals to commit crime (Williams and McShane 2010). Strain theories operate under the premise that there is a societal consensus of values, beliefs, and goals with legitimate methods for achieving success. When individuals are denied access to legitimate methods for achieving success, the result is anomie or social strain. This often leads an individual to resort to deviant or criminal means to obtain the level of success that they are socialized to pursue. This is the basic premise of strain theory. This paper will explore the evolution of strain theories by first examining their intellectual foundations which laid the foundation for Robert Merton’s theories of anomie and strain. Merton’s strain theory will be discussed in detail including the modes of adaptation that people use when faced with societal strain. Finally, the paper will conclude with the strengths and weaknesses of Merton’s strain theory and an examination of the criminological theories and social policies it has influenced.