Functionalist, Subcultural Strain Theories
Inevitability of Crime:
Functionalists would argue too much crime destabilises society, they would argue
how C+D is normal and, in all societies, because it has always been there.
Durkheim:
Why is crime inevitable?
- Not everyone is shared into the same norms + values, creating difference.
Due to the difference, we will see difference.
- In complex modern societies (like our own), diverse lifestyles lead to creation
of subcultures (subcultures will have their own norms + values so may
contradict mainstream society + would be deviant).
- Durkheim – tendency towards anomie (lack of norms) in modern societies
Complex societies breed increasingly complex individuals greater diversity
means greater differences between individuals this weakens rules which
govern behaviour, leading to deviance.
Positive functions of crime:
- ‘Boundary maintenance’ – punishing wrongdoers.
- ‘Adaption + change’- all changes in society start with deviance. No deviance =
no change. E.g., homosexuality, women’s rights + end of slavery.
Other functions of C+D:
- Polsky – pornography is a safe channel for sexual desire + doesn’t threaten
nuclear fam like adultery would.
- Erikson – institutions in society exist to ensure crime occurs (police) as this
ensures society stays together.
Criticisms of Durkheim (male):
- Crime doesn’t always promote solidarity; it can promote fear +solidarity for
individuals.
- Might explain its function (to create social solidarity) but doesn’t explain why it
was there in the first place.
Merton’s Strain Theory:
- People engage in deviant behaviour when they are unable to achieve socially
approved goals by legitimate means. From childhood, we are told what we
can and cannot do, so may turn to C+D when we cannot achieve these things
by legitimate means.
- Adapted Durkheim’s idea of ‘anomie’ to explain deviance. This is through
structural factors (society’s unequal opportunity structure. Not enough
opportunities for everyone in society to achieve goals by legitimate means) +
cultural factors (strong emphasis on success goals, weaker emphasis on
using legitimate means to achieve them)
Inevitability of Crime:
Functionalists would argue too much crime destabilises society, they would argue
how C+D is normal and, in all societies, because it has always been there.
Durkheim:
Why is crime inevitable?
- Not everyone is shared into the same norms + values, creating difference.
Due to the difference, we will see difference.
- In complex modern societies (like our own), diverse lifestyles lead to creation
of subcultures (subcultures will have their own norms + values so may
contradict mainstream society + would be deviant).
- Durkheim – tendency towards anomie (lack of norms) in modern societies
Complex societies breed increasingly complex individuals greater diversity
means greater differences between individuals this weakens rules which
govern behaviour, leading to deviance.
Positive functions of crime:
- ‘Boundary maintenance’ – punishing wrongdoers.
- ‘Adaption + change’- all changes in society start with deviance. No deviance =
no change. E.g., homosexuality, women’s rights + end of slavery.
Other functions of C+D:
- Polsky – pornography is a safe channel for sexual desire + doesn’t threaten
nuclear fam like adultery would.
- Erikson – institutions in society exist to ensure crime occurs (police) as this
ensures society stays together.
Criticisms of Durkheim (male):
- Crime doesn’t always promote solidarity; it can promote fear +solidarity for
individuals.
- Might explain its function (to create social solidarity) but doesn’t explain why it
was there in the first place.
Merton’s Strain Theory:
- People engage in deviant behaviour when they are unable to achieve socially
approved goals by legitimate means. From childhood, we are told what we
can and cannot do, so may turn to C+D when we cannot achieve these things
by legitimate means.
- Adapted Durkheim’s idea of ‘anomie’ to explain deviance. This is through
structural factors (society’s unequal opportunity structure. Not enough
opportunities for everyone in society to achieve goals by legitimate means) +
cultural factors (strong emphasis on success goals, weaker emphasis on
using legitimate means to achieve them)
