Subcultural Explanation of Crime and Deviance
Assess subcultural explanation of crime and deviance
Subcultural theories are used as an attempt to understand the cause of crime and deviance, they state that people who commit crime share different values from the mass law abiding members of society. They argue that these crime-committing people do not completely oppose to mainstream values; rather they have amended certain values forming ‘subcultures’.
Theorists Albert Cohen believes that status frustration is the motive behind delinquent acts that are not for economic gain, but motivated by status frustration whereby they feel looked down upon by the rest of society and denied any status. Cohen found that lower class boys strove to match the middle class values and aspirations but lacked the means to attain this success. This led to a sense of personal failure and humiliation which resulted in them rejecting these very values and inverting them by behaving badly and engaging in antisocial behavior as an alternate route to gain status. For example, vandalism and petty theft are delinquent acts that can be seen as a way of them “hitting back” at society. In other words, aware of being branded failures by the school, the lower streams develop their own subculture, based on a reversal of school values.
The idea of ‘strain’ that sociologist Merton uses in his theory has a very significant impact on the views of Cloward and Ohlin. Merton believes that crime and deviance is due to a strain between the socially accepted goals of society and the socially approved ways of obtaining these goals. For example, ‘strain’ are ways that prevent certain groups from succeeding such as material or cultural deprivation. Cloward and Ohlin argue that Merton failed to appreciate that there was an illegitimate opportunity structure, which meant that for some subcultures, a regular illegal career was available with recognized illegal means of obtaining society’s goals.
Subcultural theories are used as an attempt to understand the cause of crime and deviance, they state that people who commit crime share different values from the mass law abiding members of society. They argue that these crime-committing people do not completely oppose to mainstream values; rather they have amended certain values forming ‘subcultures’.
Theorists Albert Cohen believes that status frustration is the motive behind delinquent acts that are not for economic gain, but motivated by status frustration whereby they feel looked down upon by the rest of society and denied any status. Cohen found that lower class boys strove to match the middle class values and aspirations but lacked the means to attain this success. This led to a sense of personal failure and humiliation which resulted in them rejecting these very values and inverting them by behaving badly and engaging in antisocial behavior as an alternate route to gain status. For example, vandalism and petty theft are delinquent acts that can be seen as a way of them “hitting back” at society. In other words, aware of being branded failures by the school, the lower streams develop their own subculture, based on a reversal of school values.
The idea of ‘strain’ that sociologist Merton uses in his theory has a very significant impact on the views of Cloward and Ohlin. Merton believes that crime and deviance is due to a strain between the socially accepted goals of society and the socially approved ways of obtaining these goals. For example, ‘strain’ are ways that prevent certain groups from succeeding such as material or cultural deprivation. Cloward and Ohlin argue that Merton failed to appreciate that there was an illegitimate opportunity structure, which meant that for some subcultures, a regular illegal career was available with recognized illegal means of obtaining society’s goals.