INTRO –
Labelling theory is the view of deviance according to which being labelled as a "deviant" leads a
person to engage in deviant behaviour. As stated in item A labelling theorists ask how and why some
groups and acts come to be labelled as criminal or deviant whilst others do not.
Labelling theorists look at the social construction of crime. They argue that no act is inherently
criminal in itself or deviant in itself in all situations and at all times. Instead, it only comes to be so
when others label it as such. For howard becker a deviant is someone who has been labelled
successfully and deviant behaviour is simply behaviour that people so label. This leads labelling
theorists to look at why and how rules and laws het made. They are particularly interested in what
becker calls ‘moral entrepreneurs’ moral entrepreneurs are individuals who aim to change the law.
However, becker argues that new law invariably has two effects. It creates a new groups of ‘outsiders’
– deviants who break the new rule and it creates or expands social control agencies (such as the
police) to enforce the rules and impose labels of offenders. An example of this is shown by Platt. He
argues the idea of ‘juveline deliquency’ was created as aa result of a campaign by upper class
Victorian moral entrepreuners aimed at protecting young people at risk. This established ‘juveniles’
as a separate category of offender with their own courts, and it enabled the state to extend its
powers beyond criminal offences involving the young into so called ‘status offences’ (where their
behaviour is only offence because of their age) such as truancy and sexual promiscuity. Becker also
notes that social control agencies campaign for changes in the law to be made to increase their
power. For example the US federal bureau successfully campaigned for the passing of the marijuana
tax act in 1939 to outlaw marijuana use.
To evaluate, labelling theory recognises the role of power in creating deviance but it fails to analyse
the source of this power. As a result it focuses on ‘middle range officials’ such as policemen who
apply the labels rather than on the capitalist class who (in the view of Marxists) make the rules in the
first place. It also fails to explain the origin of the labels or why they are applied to certain groups,
such as the working class.
Labelling theorists not only look at the social construction of crime they also look at who gets
labelled. Not everyone who commits an offence is punished for it. Whether a person is arrested,
charged and convicted depends on factors such as : their appearance and background, their
interactions with agencies of social control and the situation and circumstances of the offence. This
leads labelling theorists to look at how the laws are applied and enforced. Studies have shown that
agencies of social control are more likely to label certain groups of people as deviant or criminal. For
example, pillivian and briar found that police decisions to arrest youth were mainly based on physical
cues (manner and dress) from which they made judgements about their characters. Officers
decisions were also influenced by the suspects gender class and ethnicity as well as by time and
place. For example, those stopped late at night in high crime areas were at a greater risk of being
arrested. A study of anti social behaviour found they were disproportionally used against ethnic
minorities.
Marxists would agree that suspects are judged based on physical cues and officers decisions are
influenced by the suspects class. Marxists would argue that the law is enforced disproportionately
against the Working class and that therefore the official crime stats cant be taken at face value.
However they criticise labelling theory for failing to examine the wider structure of capitalism within
which law making law enforcement and offending take place.
Labelling theory is the view of deviance according to which being labelled as a "deviant" leads a
person to engage in deviant behaviour. As stated in item A labelling theorists ask how and why some
groups and acts come to be labelled as criminal or deviant whilst others do not.
Labelling theorists look at the social construction of crime. They argue that no act is inherently
criminal in itself or deviant in itself in all situations and at all times. Instead, it only comes to be so
when others label it as such. For howard becker a deviant is someone who has been labelled
successfully and deviant behaviour is simply behaviour that people so label. This leads labelling
theorists to look at why and how rules and laws het made. They are particularly interested in what
becker calls ‘moral entrepreneurs’ moral entrepreneurs are individuals who aim to change the law.
However, becker argues that new law invariably has two effects. It creates a new groups of ‘outsiders’
– deviants who break the new rule and it creates or expands social control agencies (such as the
police) to enforce the rules and impose labels of offenders. An example of this is shown by Platt. He
argues the idea of ‘juveline deliquency’ was created as aa result of a campaign by upper class
Victorian moral entrepreuners aimed at protecting young people at risk. This established ‘juveniles’
as a separate category of offender with their own courts, and it enabled the state to extend its
powers beyond criminal offences involving the young into so called ‘status offences’ (where their
behaviour is only offence because of their age) such as truancy and sexual promiscuity. Becker also
notes that social control agencies campaign for changes in the law to be made to increase their
power. For example the US federal bureau successfully campaigned for the passing of the marijuana
tax act in 1939 to outlaw marijuana use.
To evaluate, labelling theory recognises the role of power in creating deviance but it fails to analyse
the source of this power. As a result it focuses on ‘middle range officials’ such as policemen who
apply the labels rather than on the capitalist class who (in the view of Marxists) make the rules in the
first place. It also fails to explain the origin of the labels or why they are applied to certain groups,
such as the working class.
Labelling theorists not only look at the social construction of crime they also look at who gets
labelled. Not everyone who commits an offence is punished for it. Whether a person is arrested,
charged and convicted depends on factors such as : their appearance and background, their
interactions with agencies of social control and the situation and circumstances of the offence. This
leads labelling theorists to look at how the laws are applied and enforced. Studies have shown that
agencies of social control are more likely to label certain groups of people as deviant or criminal. For
example, pillivian and briar found that police decisions to arrest youth were mainly based on physical
cues (manner and dress) from which they made judgements about their characters. Officers
decisions were also influenced by the suspects gender class and ethnicity as well as by time and
place. For example, those stopped late at night in high crime areas were at a greater risk of being
arrested. A study of anti social behaviour found they were disproportionally used against ethnic
minorities.
Marxists would agree that suspects are judged based on physical cues and officers decisions are
influenced by the suspects class. Marxists would argue that the law is enforced disproportionately
against the Working class and that therefore the official crime stats cant be taken at face value.
However they criticise labelling theory for failing to examine the wider structure of capitalism within
which law making law enforcement and offending take place.
