The Social Bond Theory fits well into the life of Willie Bosket. Originated in 1969 by Travis Hirschi, Social Bond Theory argued that through effective socialization, a relationship forms between individuals and a social group. When this bond becomes weak or broken, deviance and a life of crime may result (Schmalleger 107). These bonds include components of communal relationships, including family attachments, individual commitments to social and organized norms, involvement in activities, and the belief that these factors are significant. Since the relationships have been thought to help in decreasing the need to partake in disobedient conduct, a great deal of emphasis is put on the fact that a shortage of these attachments exists among juvenile …show more content…
delinquents. During early childhood, everything went wrong for Willie Bosket. First, he was born into a single parent home, because his father had been incarcerated at this time. Butch was serving time due to the murders he had previously committed (Butterfield 138). Willie had to grow up without a father, thus leading to the lack of attachment referred to above. Laura, Willies mother was emotionally detached and often abused Willie due to her frustration. He did not experience a secure attachment with his mother: “He had been neglected and rejected by his father and mother, and he burned with an inner rage (Butterfield 82).” We also see an instance where Willie begins to get sexual abused by his grandfather, James. All of these accounts lead Willie to a life of a crime. As a result, Willie had twisted understandings of the law. These weak bonds opened the doors to delinquency and crime. I believe if there had been suitable social bonds in existence, Willie would have been more informed about the reasoning behind his father’s incarceration; moreover, he would of took the steps to educate himself on the subject matter and prevented himself from following down the same dark path. Edwin Sutherland first looked at Differential Association or Learning theory, in 1939. He felt criminality was learned through a process of differential association with others who communicate and promote criminal values. Differential association refers to the explanation for crime that holds that people pursue criminal behavior of those who they identify with, or whom they feel will accept their behavior. Sutherland was the first well-known criminologist to suggest that most human behavior is learned, including crime (Schmalleger 105). According to the belief, individuals learn to define those actions that are rewarded as positive behaviors, and learn to reiterate these behaviors. We see a perfect example of this with James Bosket, Pud’s son. Butterfield tells about how James listened by learning from his father’s example. He explains how James would tell his relatives, “When I grow up, I’m going to be a bad man, just like my father (Butterfield 84.)” James always kept his knife sharp and by his side. Although this habit was not illegal, it proves that James absorbed some of his father’s criminal tendencies. Butch, James’ son, learned some of his most violent behaviors directly off the streets. Butterfield shows this in the passage where Butch watches two men in a bar fight. He watched them fight it out to the death with knives (Butterfield 76). Butch was not learning in school; however, he was carefully absorbing the lessons of the street. Butch even received encouragement from his grandmother when it came down to fighting for respect: “ I tell my children to fight it out… If Butch don’t fight, I’m gonna beat him myself (Butterfield 85).” Butch’s later actions, more importantly, the stabbing of two men to death, support this theory of Differential Association. This is where the southern code of honor merged with the code of the street. It begun on the frontier among whites, and now, it was moving into African American neighborhoods. Butch had no human attachments and focused all his attention on being the toughest boy in the hood. Willie grew up worshipping his father Butch for his violent past.
We first see this when Willie is at Wiltwyck talking with a teacher. Willie told her, “ When I grow up, I want to be just like him”, these feelings left Willie’s teacher with the belief that he had learned that criminal behavior was a progressive and fulfilling path to go down, thanks to his father, Butch. In fact, later on in his life when he first arrived at Wiltwyck, Willie beat the crap out of inmates who threatened him sexually. After the beating, Willie told the kid, “You remember this… My father is a killer. I’m just like him, and I’ll kill you too (Butterfield …show more content…
164).” Willie may have learned violence from his mother even more so then from his father. She would toss him around like a rag doll and whip him with a belt (Butterfield 140). These beating could only strengthen Willie’s principle that the best solution was through physical violence. The final theory that assists the explanation of Willie Boskets crime causation is Strain Theory.
A man named Robert Merton created the original form of Strain Theory in 1938. Strain theory portrays misbehavior as a form of problem-solving, usually done in response to problems including frustration, an unattractive social environment, or unobtainable object or goal. Taking Emile Durkheim’s concepts of “anomie” or “without norms”. Merton created a model in which crime is caused due to strain of the person. Fluctuating based on other social factors; some folks prefer to commit crime to achieve their goals (Schmalleger 89). A main reason Willie may have turned to a life of criminality is the disadvantaged environment from the start. He came from a poor family where food and cloths were at the bare minimum. The first instance of strain little Willie faced was hunger. He would go down to the corner market and steal by any means necessary to provide extra food (Butterfield, 137). Would he have robbed the grocery store if there had been a fatter supply of food at his house? This would be a question asked by a strain
theorist. According to Merton, people facing strain can choose from five paths. Most conform, finding it hard to meet the norms of society while achieving their goals. Some turn toward ritualism, scaling down the societal construction. These individuals completely reject the goals of society; moreover, they form their own goals using means that society accepts. Other people, dealing with the same strains Willie Bosket did, retreat from society, incapable of accepting the goals of society and the means to achieve them. Willie Bosket however, with his brainpower, fearlessness, and motivation became an innovator, One who felt at a disadvantage of obtaining the “American Dream” of being economically independent, so he used whatever means he had to work on achieving that goal, legal or not.
The two theories that are being analyzed in this paper are Ronald Akers’ Social Learning Theory and Travis Hirschi’s Social Bonding Theory. Hirschi's social bonding theory is one of many control theories which all take on the task of explaining the core cause of crime; however, this particular theory seems to be the most popular and able to stand the test of time. The Social Bond theory contains four elements that explain what criminals lack that causes them to be more prone to illegal activity, these elements are attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief. On the other end of the spectrum is Akers’ Social Learning Theory, which attempts to explain the correlation between and individual's social environment and their behavior depending on what is praised or punished in an individual's specific social organization. (Walsh & Hemmens)
The strain theory as defined by Frank Schmalleger (2017) is “a sociological approach that posits a disjuncture between socially and sub-culturally sanctioned means and goals as the cause of criminal behavior” (p. 164). That is to say that there is a relationship between the legitimate goals, which every human desires (e.g. wealth, happiness, status) and the socially accepted means to achieve such goals (e.g. education, work). The strain theory states that the legal and accepted means to reach these goals are often limited – therefore, crime occurs when as an alternative mean to reach some goal. Theorists of the strain theory would describe H. H. Holmes as an innovator. That is to say, he desired legitimate goals such as wealth, but it was combined with the lack of access to reach the means. In response, he participated in illegal activity – selling stole cadavers, swindling insurance companies, killing women for their money (Schmalleger, 2017, p.
Both theories by Merton and Agnew are similar because their focus is that social situations and conflicts an individual’s comes in contact within his/her life, may produce crime by emphasizing the a goal of success, much more than the means to achieve it. With Merton’s theory he adopted Durkheim’s concept of anomie to explain deviance. Merton’s theory combined both structural and cultural factors. Merton insists that society promotes goals for their citizens and norms for other’s behavior in attempting to reach these goals. In Merton’s theory people do crime when they are unable to reach or accomplish goals. Merton’s theory also explains how an individual’s social structure prevents an individual from becoming economically fortunate. His theory of modern anomie and strain express that individuals respond to strain in 5 individual ways. Those five ways are conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. On the other hand Agnew general strain theory, feels strain comes from sources other than economic failure. Agnew general strain theory focuses on a few other types of strain and stress. Like the presentation of a negative stimuli, and the loss of a positive stimuli. Agnew feels that this sort of strain leads to a negative state of mind. The emotions like angry, frustration and fear, lead to crime and criminal behavior. One
The proposal of Robert Agnew’s General Strain Theory in explaining criminal deviance is based on three concepts. The first concept is that people are not naturally inclined to commit crimes. Rather, their transition towards deviant behavior begins when they experience strain. The second concept is that once strain is present, depending on the severity of the stain, a person becomes victim to their own negative emotions like anger, jealousy, and frustration. Their response to those negative emotions may expedite their transition. The third concept looks at a person’s ability to cope with the strain and negative emotions. If a person has poor coping abilities they tend to become overwhelmed by the strain and the negative emotions they are feeling as a result of strain. Poor coping abilities may cause someone to commit crime in hopes of rectifying their situation. (Agnew, 2011)
According to Robert Agnew, “Strain Theory is based on the idea that delinquency results when individuals are unable to achieve their goals through legitimate channels, achievement or strike out at the source of their frustration in anger”. (Agnew, R. (1985). A Revised Strain Theory of Delinquency. Oxford journals. 64(1).151-166). The norms are violated to alleviate the strain that accompanies failure. When a good look is taken at the theories the strains might not only come from peoples frustrations with acquiring “ The American Dream”, but it becomes a mixture of strains such as economic deprivation, abuse, neglect, or the loss of a loved one. However, most people that experience strains do not commit crimes.
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
General Strain Theory was discussed by Robert Agnew, and first published in 1992. According to General Strain Theory individuals engage in crime because of strains or stressors which produce anger and anxiety (Agnew, 1992). Crimes become the outlet that the individual uses to cope with or remedy the strains or stressors. Agnew states that there are three different types of deviance producing strains.
... people commit crimes and are not limited to one aspect like the original theory. For example, Merton strain theory just looked one aspect of blocked opportunities to unable achieve economic success. Differential Opportunity theory helped explain the different illegitimate means that causes people to commit crimes for example poverty and high concentrations of youth living in slums (Murphy & Robinson, 2009). Agnew General Strain theory takes a micro approach into looking at the different types of strain that causes people to commit crimes (Lilly et al.2010). Even though these theories explain certain aspects of what causes crime, it does not explain the sole cause of why criminal behavior occurs or why one commits different crimes. However integrated theories are helpful to understand certain aspects of why people commit crimes and engage in deviant behavior.
In classic strain theory it is said that, Classic strain theory focuses on that type of strain involving the inability to achieve success or gain a middle class status. General Strain theory focuses on a broad range of strains, including the inability to achieve a variety of goals, the loss of valued possessions, and negative treatment by others. General Strain Theory has been applied to a range of topics, including the explanation of gender, race/ethnicity, age, community, and societal differences in crime
These previously discussed points of Merton’s Strain theory provide insight into how Robert Merton might explain crime in what many would call “the bad part of town.” The
Various studies have determined that delinquent behavior is often related to how weak or strong an individual’s social bonds are. In 1969, Travis Hirschi identified four social bonds, which were attachments, commitment, involvement, and belief. Attachment is often defined as an emotional connection to other individuals such as parents, teachers, and friends. Hirschi’s second social bond is defined as commitment. This particular social bond states that if an individual is dedicated and concerned about their investment in conventional activates they are less likely to engage in illegal acts (Hirschi, 1969). Furthermore, involvement is the social bond that prevents individuals from engaging in illegal acts. If an individual is involved in conventional
There are many criminological theories that attempt to explain criminal behavior or crime patterns. For instance, Agnew’s General Strain Theory can be applied to explain why the criminal John Dillinger committed various crimes. Agnew’s General Strain Theory assumes that all individuals experience strain, which, in turn, causes negative emotions that can result in legitimate or illegitimate coping, depending on an individual’s constraints or dispositions. Thus, the continuous criminal behavior throughout John Dillinger’s life can be explained using Agnew’s General Strain Theory in relation to strain, negative emotions, and dispositions.
This could explain the effect of strains on crime by taken this theory into account. Once strain causes bonds to weaken amongst conventional groups and institutions such as family, school, and peer networks will open up doors to delinquent behaviors, because by being in these social roles causes the person to regulate by role expectations.
In conclusion, Social Bond Theory has been around for many years and has stood the test of time. The four bonds, attachment, involvement, commitment and belief are all held by individuals and play a major part in determining criminality. While it does not describe deviance perfectly, it does match what is believed to be the basic human view of why people become criminals. The view of Social Bond Theory is that all humans are basically evil and that deviance is a natural process. It is just a matter of how weak or strong these bonds are that either promotes, or deters deviance.
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.