Merton (1968) developed Durkheim's concept of 'anomie' into his 'strain theory'. Taking the American Dream of economic success he pointed out that it was not possible for everyone to achieve this goal. So how do we cope? Some succeed by legal means, others turn to illegal paths, some give up on the goal and others make up their own goals Sociological Explanations Of Deviance

Conformity The response of the majority They accept the goals of society and the legal means to achieve them Typical ‘law abiding’ citizen

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Innovation Accept the goals of society - material success But reject legal ways of achieving them May turn to crime to achieve a good lifestyle Some turn to gambling to achieve this which is not illegal but not the ‘normal’ route to success

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Ritualism Individuals lose sight of the goals - or give up But continue to obey the law Stuck in a rut May hope for lottery win

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Retreatism Individual loses sight of goals and the means May ‘drop out’ or ‘opt out’ of mainstream society

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Rebellion Individual rejects the goals and means of mainstream society And substitutes them with new ones These are often at odds with mainstream society eg revolutionary, terrorist etc

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Evaluating Merton's contribution He ignores power and social class issues Taylor 1971 sees Merton’s model as a gigantic fruit machine ‘only some players are rewarded…but nobody... asks who put the game there in the first place’ Merton fails to explain why an individual chooses one response over another Merton blindly accepts that there is a common core set of values shared by everyone

Subcultures are usually defined as cultures within a culture e.g youth culture, working class subculture etc. Some of these groups are antagonistic towards mainstream society and are often referred to as countercultures (see Willis study in Education notes). Those groups who want to overthrow the main culture are called 'contracultures' Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Subcultural Theories

Subcultural theory has its roots in the Chicago school which earlier this century identified a zoning process in the city whereby groups of similar cultural background occupied the same neighbourhood. Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Subcultural Theories

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Albert Cohen (1966) An American - he looked at subcultures and gangs WC male deviance was not necessarily related to economic ends Vandalism has no economic reward! He explained such acts in the context of ‘status frustration’ i.e. Failures at school, often unemployed or in dead end jobs, lived in poor areas and therefore felt they had little stake in ‘mainstream’ society. Subcultural Theories

A number of British studies have supported Cohen’s views James Patrick – A Glasgow Gang Observed 1973 – see methods notes David Hargreaves – Deviance in the Classroom 1975 Stephen Ball – Beachside Comprehensive 1981 Paul Willis – Learning To Labour 1977 (all in Education notes) Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Evaluating Cohen’s views

1.Interpretivists question the idea that we all share such a common value system. 2. All subcultural theories mainly focus on males. Feminists have used the phrase ‘malestream’ sociology to show how females have been ignored in sociology (at least before the 1970’s) Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Evaluating Cohen’s views

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Cloward & Ohlin 1961 Looked at similar issues to Cohen and linked aspects of subcultural theory to Merton’s concept of anomie:- Subcultural Theories

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Criminal Subculture This occurs in areas where an established underworld already exists Young males serve ‘apprenticeships’ in this world e.g. the world of the Kray twins Subcultural Theories

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Conflict Subculture No clear criminal underworld exists No ‘apprenticeships’ to follow Young males turn to gangs e.g Patrick’s study of Glasgow gangs Subcultural Theories

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Retreatist Subculture These are seen as ‘double’ failures Neither able to serve ‘apprenticeships’ or join gangs Resort to drug abuse and petty crime. Subcultural Theories

The above subcultural approaches have often been criticised for being too deterministic – i.e they see the deviant as a product of his/her social background. Matza attempts to address this shortcoming by showing that we operate with double standards – on the surface we share common law abiding values, but underneath we can occasionally let ‘opposite’ values affect our behaviour Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Matza 1964

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Subterranean Values People have a surface where they accept the mainstream values But underneath we have opposite values which surface from time to time e.g. a wife/husband commits adultery a boss gets drunk at the office party What Freud calls the ‘monsters of the id’ Matza

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Techniques Of Neutralization How people explain ‘untypical’ behaviour ‘I was drunk’ ‘It’s Christmas’ etc. ‘Everyone does it’ The difference is that some groups - the WC commit a lot of their acts in public. Consider acts of drunkeness on the street on a Saturday night and in a rugby club - who is more likely to be arrested Matza

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance Evaluating Matza’s Work Matza adds some balance to the deterministic views of the structuralists But the techniques of neutralisation may be just excuses Matza