Why Can T Sociologists Decide What Cause Crime?

Crime is often described as socially constructed, which influences our understanding of who commits a crime. Firstly, labelling theorists argue that crime is a social construction based on the powerful’s reaction to certain behaviour, those who are deviant are people that have been labelled as such. Marxists claim the bourgeoise construct crime in order to criminalise the proletariat, get away with their own deviance and maintain their own dominance. Neo-marxists look at how moral panics create a social construction of crime and can criminalise certain groups. Finally, feminists, argue crime is constructed in a patriarchal way and that the criminal justice system is harsher to female offenders. Whereas others criticise these theories for

This particular work will consist of a critical theoretical review and a comparative analysis on two criminological theories. For the comparison I have chosen Marx’s theory of crime and Merton’s strain theory of deviance. My critical comparison analysis will emphasise the central concepts and arguments within both theories and how each theory explains crime. The analysis will then explore modern day studies in which have stemmed from these theories as well as explore the many similarities and differences between these two theories. Exploring the strengths and weaknesses in both approaches and concluding that although both theories are

Additionally, functionalism maintains that crime and deviance are normal responses to one’s environment (Gervais: October 1, 2017). Doughboy lives in an neighbourhood where he is constantly exposed to violence, and as a result, he too engages in criminal behaviour. Also, the tension-reduction function demonstrates that Doughboy uses crime and deviance as a way to relieve the tensions accumulated in his life, especially those that are caused by his mother’s differential treatment of her son’s Ricky and Doughboy (Gervais: Oct 1, 2017). At the same time, social disorganization can be used to explain Doughboy’s deviant behaviour. Doughboy is responding to the social disorganization in the community by conforming to the deviant behaviour that resides in the members of the community itself. He fulfills the expectations of other members in the community by engaging in like-minded activities, such as selling drugs, being a member of a gang, and by using ‘hood-like’ language that is incredibly sexist and racialist.

According to Lilly, Cullen, and Ball (232) Feminist theory has been on the back burner of modern criminology until the late 19th century. As with the other criminology theories there are many thoughts and ideas on why females commit crimes. In the beginning the theories seem to revolve around the victimization of the female gender. Then criminologist took a look at female delinquency, prostitution, and gender inequality in the criminal justice system. Lilly (233) wrote that Lombroso used physiological traits to determine what type of women would commit crime. Lombroso also argued that the women that committed the most crime were more masculine then the women who did not commit crime. He used physiological immobility, and passivity to make the argument. Lilly (235) also wrote that Sigmund Freud believed the reason women committed crime was because they has “penis envy”. Since women were physical different than men, women would become more aggressive trying to act like the male counterpart in order to fit in with the status quo.

This has become more apparent whilst studying the works of Robert Merton who presented his notion of modes of responses to crime. In addition, perspectives of why crime is committed have become more critical. Freudian based ideas could explain why crimes are committed. Sigmund Freud's psychodynamic theory explains how our weak and deviant superegos are the main sources of crime.

In Criminological Theory: Past to Present, Part IX talks about Feminist Theories. In the past, criminology focused almost entirely on men and their deviant behavior. Part of this was due to the fact that men were committing most of the crimes. Some scholars believed that women only engaged in crime because the biological makeup of their feminine nature had been compromised and was defective. This chapter gives insight on different scholar’s ideas and theories in why women engage in crime. Times are changing, women are leaving their homes and becoming more independent. This can lead to more opportunities for them to engage in crime.

The functionalist view in relation to deviance is a belief that anyone can be convicted of a crime. Everyone is treated equal in the eyes of law. For example, a celebrity and a homeless man could both be convicted for the same crime. Both would be tried the same, with equal consequences. The Social conflict view is a view in which the elites make the laws. An example of the Social conflict view would be a Rich man making a law to benefit only the upper class. Symbolic Interactionism is when moral entrepreneurs push for certain laws. Symbolic Interactionism uses the labeling theory. An example of Symbolic interaction in deviance would be a past criminal being labeled as more dangerous than a first time criminal who simply made a mistake.

The result has been failure to consider important difference in male and female pathways into crime, types of crime, victimization, and punishments. Feminist criminology seeks

Gender is on the agenda” wrote Francis Heidensohn (1989) Feminist definition of crime is that “crime is politically informed and linked to particular interests”– of men. Before feminism, women were invisible in sociological research, this meant that explanations for female recidivism saw, female crime as a ’special case’ resulting from sexual promiscuity and biological deviance. Biological explanations for male criminality have lost credibility yet feminist research argued that biological explanations were used to understand female crimes for example the persecution of Maxine Carr. Some feminist criminologists accept that women commit

The theoretical explanation of women’s crime that I find most appealing is psychological explanations. “Psychological aspects of offending include psychopathic modes of thinking, a background of personal trauma, and emotions such as anger and depression”. The book explains that our feelings are obviously linked to biology, and in this theory there is usually an explanation for female offending that relates to a history of trauma and victimization.

Feminist Criminology emerged as a reactionary school of criminology, intending to investigate the smaller, but still important role of female offenders through critique and correction of the mainstream criminological theories, and their tendency to discriminate against women, thus addressing the Generalizability Problem. In this paper I will outline the traditional schools of thought about female offenders along with the criticisms of these theories, as well explain feminist criminology theories and their impact on how female offenders are viewed today, both by society and the criminal justice system.

According to Carlen (1990), there were two major arguments claiming that feminists should not concern themselves with the study of “women and crime.” One of the arguments is called ‘deconstructionist agnostic and the other is ‘deconstructionist libertarian.’ The ‘deconstructionist agnostic’ argued against women and crime in the discipline of criminology and labeled such as “feminists,” are not significant. The ‘deconstructionist/libertarian’ suggests a denial that a decrease in women’s misconduct is an appropriate concern of criminologists and that consequently criminologists should not pursue to excuse policy suggestions on the grounds that they might aid unlawful women keep out of trouble in the

A wise man once said, “Life is a paradox-society forces us into conformity, yet progress can only be made through deviance” (Unknown). As norms vary [widely], deviance is relative (Brym and Lie 2015). Deviance is a social construct that is often observed in society as, “everyone is a deviant in one social context or the other (Brym and Lie 2015:95). For that reason, sociologists have come up with theories to explain deviance and crime within various sociological frameworks. While some theorists “focus on the learning and labelling of deviant behaviour, social functionalists direct their attention to the social dysfunctions that lead to deviant and criminal behaviour” (Brym and Lie 2015:102). According to Brym and Lie, “deviance is the departure from a norm that evokes a negative reaction from others” (2015:96). As human beings, we are likely to do things that deviate from the norm or go against traditional values, as customs differ across cultures. Personally, for me, life hasn’t always been smooth sailing. Growing up in the rural parts of Jamaica is hard, but it is even more difficult when you are not financially stable and with the dwindling economy, it is hard to find jobs in the cities let alone in the rural areas. Because of my circumstances, I have participated in deviance as a way of finding new means to achieving new goals.

The functionalist point of view on crime and deviance, is that the functionalist theory gives a micro level approach. It focuses more at the bigger picture, giving more knowledge into how the general public structures relating to crime and deviance. It also provides a respectable argument, in regard to how the natural hypothesis identifies with crime. Robert Merton's theory (1968) gives a better view regarding sociological thinking, in our society today.

There is not just one singular concept for Feminist theories, multiple ideas have been brought to the forefront when discussing feminist theory of crimes. All these theories share the common notion that their main concern is for inequality, discrimination and the overall disrespect and oppression towards women. “Feminist perspectives, over the past thirty years have not only put some new topics under the criminological cover, they have challenged the theories, concepts, methods and assumptions of most of the people already involved in the study of crime” (Historylearningsitecouk, 2016). Most of the mainstream theories that already exist presumed that the overall findings would fit all genders, when in reality this is not the case at all.