WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.480 --> 00:00:03.520
<v Speaker 1>Hello, and welcome to episode five of Crime and Deviants

2
00:00:03.560 --> 00:00:06.559
<v Speaker 1>for the Sociology Show podcast. In this episode, we'll look

3
00:00:06.559 --> 00:00:09.839
<v Speaker 1>at interactionist ideas, So we would consider how is crime

4
00:00:09.960 --> 00:00:14.279
<v Speaker 1>socially constructed, what is the labeling process, what's the difference

5
00:00:14.279 --> 00:00:17.679
<v Speaker 1>between primary and secondary deviants, who makes the rules? And

6
00:00:17.719 --> 00:00:23.079
<v Speaker 1>how can interactionist ideas influence social policy. So interactionist ideas

7
00:00:23.079 --> 00:00:25.120
<v Speaker 1>of crime and deviance were developed through the work of

8
00:00:25.160 --> 00:00:29.000
<v Speaker 1>Howard Becker in the nineteen sixties, and interactionists take an

9
00:00:29.039 --> 00:00:33.799
<v Speaker 1>opposing view to the structuralists. Remember, structuralist sociologists such as functionists,

10
00:00:33.799 --> 00:00:37.000
<v Speaker 1>Marxist and feminists take a macro or large scale approach

11
00:00:37.280 --> 00:00:40.240
<v Speaker 1>and they look at how institutions such as the family, media,

12
00:00:40.240 --> 00:00:44.640
<v Speaker 1>and education influence our behavior. As a result, crime has

13
00:00:44.679 --> 00:00:49.640
<v Speaker 1>its origins in these structures according to structuralists. However, for interactionists,

14
00:00:49.719 --> 00:00:53.560
<v Speaker 1>the structures are not significant, but people and their interactions

15
00:00:53.600 --> 00:00:57.719
<v Speaker 1>with others are. Interactionists therefore take a micro or small

16
00:00:57.759 --> 00:01:01.159
<v Speaker 1>scale view of society and choose to folks on individuals

17
00:01:01.439 --> 00:01:05.159
<v Speaker 1>because people exchange meanings and motives which can change society

18
00:01:05.200 --> 00:01:08.680
<v Speaker 1>as a whole. Interactionists believe crime should not be taken

19
00:01:08.719 --> 00:01:11.159
<v Speaker 1>at face value, as it is what they call socially

20
00:01:11.200 --> 00:01:16.400
<v Speaker 1>constructed and therefore is relative to time and culture. Most importantly,

21
00:01:16.640 --> 00:01:19.359
<v Speaker 1>they suggest that we shouldn't just accept the criminals of

22
00:01:19.439 --> 00:01:22.319
<v Speaker 1>those in prison, but rather that crime and criminals are

23
00:01:22.359 --> 00:01:27.120
<v Speaker 1>created by society and defined by moral entrepreneurs like the police,

24
00:01:27.359 --> 00:01:31.879
<v Speaker 1>the courts, and the media. Interactionists are also interested in

25
00:01:31.959 --> 00:01:35.599
<v Speaker 1>the role these institutions of control construct and what is

26
00:01:35.680 --> 00:01:38.719
<v Speaker 1>crime and deviance and who is deemed criminal or deviant?

27
00:01:39.519 --> 00:01:42.280
<v Speaker 1>So let's start with Howard Becker. And Howard Becker was

28
00:01:42.319 --> 00:01:44.719
<v Speaker 1>writing in the nineteen sixties and he said there is

29
00:01:44.760 --> 00:01:47.879
<v Speaker 1>a process to becoming labeled as a deviant or as

30
00:01:47.920 --> 00:01:51.599
<v Speaker 1>a criminal. Becker is the founding father of labeling theory.

31
00:01:52.040 --> 00:01:55.079
<v Speaker 1>Becker once said, deviancy is not a quality of the

32
00:01:55.120 --> 00:01:58.840
<v Speaker 1>act a person commits, but rather a consequence of the

33
00:01:58.920 --> 00:02:02.640
<v Speaker 1>application by others of rules and sanctions to an offender.

34
00:02:03.319 --> 00:02:05.920
<v Speaker 1>The deviant is the one whom that label has been

35
00:02:05.959 --> 00:02:11.560
<v Speaker 1>successfully applied. Deviant behavior, therefore, is behavior that other people label.

36
00:02:11.639 --> 00:02:15.280
<v Speaker 1>So Becker is suggesting that most people commit deviant and

37
00:02:15.319 --> 00:02:18.599
<v Speaker 1>criminal acts what he calls primary deviants, but only some

38
00:02:18.639 --> 00:02:21.520
<v Speaker 1>people are caught and stigmatize. For them what he calls

39
00:02:21.719 --> 00:02:25.840
<v Speaker 1>secondary deviance. If most people commit deviant acts of some kind,

40
00:02:26.120 --> 00:02:28.840
<v Speaker 1>it is pointless trying to search for the differences between

41
00:02:29.039 --> 00:02:32.960
<v Speaker 1>deviance and non deviance. Instead, we should try to understand

42
00:02:33.039 --> 00:02:35.680
<v Speaker 1>why some people have been labeled as deviant and others

43
00:02:35.680 --> 00:02:39.080
<v Speaker 1>have not. Becker noted that as social beings, our identity

44
00:02:39.159 --> 00:02:42.080
<v Speaker 1>is largely to do with how others see us. If

45
00:02:42.120 --> 00:02:44.800
<v Speaker 1>people see us negatively, this could affect the way in

46
00:02:44.840 --> 00:02:48.960
<v Speaker 1>which we behave. The labeling process, according to Becker, then

47
00:02:49.280 --> 00:02:53.960
<v Speaker 1>happens in five stages. Firstly, a moral entrepreneur tries to

48
00:02:54.000 --> 00:02:57.560
<v Speaker 1>attach a label to an act of secondary deviance. Moral

49
00:02:57.719 --> 00:03:01.159
<v Speaker 1>entrepreneurs are people with your authority to label others, so

50
00:03:01.199 --> 00:03:04.800
<v Speaker 1>they are teachers, police officers, judges, and so on. They

51
00:03:04.879 --> 00:03:09.039
<v Speaker 1>start the labeling process by publicly identifying an activity as

52
00:03:09.120 --> 00:03:13.479
<v Speaker 1>criminal or deviant. In stage two, the labeled person may

53
00:03:13.520 --> 00:03:16.840
<v Speaker 1>accept the label even if it isn't true. A person's

54
00:03:16.840 --> 00:03:19.879
<v Speaker 1>self conception is largely made up of what other people

55
00:03:19.919 --> 00:03:23.400
<v Speaker 1>think of them. At stage three, the label may become

56
00:03:23.439 --> 00:03:27.319
<v Speaker 1>what Becker called a master status. We all have different statuses,

57
00:03:27.360 --> 00:03:29.319
<v Speaker 1>such as a friend or a neighbor, or a sibling

58
00:03:29.400 --> 00:03:32.360
<v Speaker 1>or a student Becker suggests that the label could become

59
00:03:32.360 --> 00:03:35.639
<v Speaker 1>a master status and take over all the others, becoming

60
00:03:35.680 --> 00:03:39.199
<v Speaker 1>the most dominant of our labels. At stage four, we

61
00:03:39.360 --> 00:03:42.360
<v Speaker 1>may start to see a self fulfilling prophecy. If the

62
00:03:42.439 --> 00:03:46.400
<v Speaker 1>label becomes deeply accepted, the individual may display signs of

63
00:03:46.439 --> 00:03:50.479
<v Speaker 1>deviant activity connected with that label. Seeing as people believe

64
00:03:50.520 --> 00:03:54.120
<v Speaker 1>they are a deviant anyway, this completes the process, as

65
00:03:54.159 --> 00:03:57.199
<v Speaker 1>this confirmed the label in the eyes of others. At

66
00:03:57.199 --> 00:04:00.919
<v Speaker 1>stage five, interactions, however, also believe that an individual has

67
00:04:00.960 --> 00:04:04.199
<v Speaker 1>the power to reject the label and negotiate his or

68
00:04:04.240 --> 00:04:07.919
<v Speaker 1>her identity. At this point, Becker suggests that a person

69
00:04:07.919 --> 00:04:10.800
<v Speaker 1>could just deny the label or not let it affect

70
00:04:10.800 --> 00:04:14.560
<v Speaker 1>their self image. They could also manage to negotiate by

71
00:04:14.560 --> 00:04:18.519
<v Speaker 1>convincing other agents of social control that the label isn't true.

72
00:04:18.879 --> 00:04:22.399
<v Speaker 1>Becker's most famous example is this study of outlawing cannabis

73
00:04:22.519 --> 00:04:25.720
<v Speaker 1>use in the USA in the nineteen thirties. Cannabis had

74
00:04:25.720 --> 00:04:28.920
<v Speaker 1>been widely used in southern states of the USA until

75
00:04:28.959 --> 00:04:32.600
<v Speaker 1>it became outlawed due to a successful campaign waged by

76
00:04:32.639 --> 00:04:37.279
<v Speaker 1>the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, who, after changing the prohibition laws,

77
00:04:37.439 --> 00:04:40.759
<v Speaker 1>saw cannabis as a growing menace in society. Through a

78
00:04:40.800 --> 00:04:44.199
<v Speaker 1>press campaign and lobbying of senior politicians, the Bureau was

79
00:04:44.240 --> 00:04:48.720
<v Speaker 1>successful in outlawing cannabis growing and its use. However, Becker

80
00:04:48.759 --> 00:04:51.639
<v Speaker 1>points out that the campaign was only successful because it

81
00:04:51.800 --> 00:04:55.240
<v Speaker 1>plugged into values commonly held in the USA, which included

82
00:04:55.360 --> 00:04:58.040
<v Speaker 1>firstly the belief that people ought to be in control

83
00:04:58.079 --> 00:05:01.439
<v Speaker 1>of their actions and decisions, and secondly that pleasure for

84
00:05:01.519 --> 00:05:04.240
<v Speaker 1>its own sake was wrong, and finally that drugs were

85
00:05:04.240 --> 00:05:07.959
<v Speaker 1>seen as addictive and as such enslaved people. The term

86
00:05:08.040 --> 00:05:11.160
<v Speaker 1>Becker used to describe the campaign was a moral crusade,

87
00:05:11.319 --> 00:05:14.920
<v Speaker 1>and this terminology is used to describe ethical movements to

88
00:05:15.000 --> 00:05:20.160
<v Speaker 1>pass laws. The second sociologist for the interactions perspective we

89
00:05:20.279 --> 00:05:23.319
<v Speaker 1>look at is Cicarel, and he talks about the negotiation

90
00:05:23.439 --> 00:05:27.000
<v Speaker 1>of justice. Cicarell's work on the police shows how influential

91
00:05:27.040 --> 00:05:31.439
<v Speaker 1>moral entrepreneurs can influence laws. Ciicarel found that the police

92
00:05:31.480 --> 00:05:34.720
<v Speaker 1>acted as moral entrepreneurs, with working class and middle class

93
00:05:34.839 --> 00:05:38.040
<v Speaker 1>use influencing the way in which labels occurred for the

94
00:05:38.079 --> 00:05:41.800
<v Speaker 1>two groups. The process of defining a young person as

95
00:05:41.839 --> 00:05:46.120
<v Speaker 1>a delinquent is not simple, clear cut and unproblematic. Its complex,

96
00:05:46.240 --> 00:05:49.920
<v Speaker 1>involving a series of interactions based on sets of meanings

97
00:05:50.040 --> 00:05:54.120
<v Speaker 1>held by the participants. These meanings can be modified during

98
00:05:54.160 --> 00:05:58.399
<v Speaker 1>the interaction, so each stage in the process is negotiable.

99
00:05:59.079 --> 00:06:01.519
<v Speaker 1>The first stage is the decision by the police to

100
00:06:01.560 --> 00:06:05.000
<v Speaker 1>stop and interrogate an individual. The decision is based on

101
00:06:05.079 --> 00:06:09.160
<v Speaker 1>meanings held by the police as to what is suspicious, strange, unusual,

102
00:06:09.319 --> 00:06:13.480
<v Speaker 1>or wrong. Such meanings are related to particular geographical areas

103
00:06:13.879 --> 00:06:16.439
<v Speaker 1>in a city. Low income areas are seen as bad

104
00:06:16.480 --> 00:06:19.439
<v Speaker 1>areas with high crime rates, and so behaviour in such

105
00:06:19.519 --> 00:06:23.240
<v Speaker 1>areas is more likely to be viewed as suspicious. Interrogation

106
00:06:23.680 --> 00:06:27.279
<v Speaker 1>need not lead to arrest. The process is negotiable, but

107
00:06:27.360 --> 00:06:29.639
<v Speaker 1>depends largely on the picture held by the police of

108
00:06:29.680 --> 00:06:33.160
<v Speaker 1>the typical delinquent. If the appearance, language, and demeanor of

109
00:06:33.160 --> 00:06:36.240
<v Speaker 1>the young person fits this picture, she or he is

110
00:06:36.279 --> 00:06:39.759
<v Speaker 1>more likely to be arrested. It's not surprising, therefore, that

111
00:06:39.800 --> 00:06:44.040
<v Speaker 1>Sicarell found a close relationship between social class and delinquency.

112
00:06:44.519 --> 00:06:47.839
<v Speaker 1>Most young people convicted of offenses had fathers who were

113
00:06:47.879 --> 00:06:52.160
<v Speaker 1>manual workers. On a seven class occupational scale, Sicarell found

114
00:06:52.199 --> 00:06:56.040
<v Speaker 1>that one third came from a class seven Sicarell suggested

115
00:06:56.199 --> 00:06:59.519
<v Speaker 1>when middle class juveniles were arrested, there was less likelihood

116
00:06:59.560 --> 00:07:02.600
<v Speaker 1>of them being charged with an offense. Their background did

117
00:07:02.600 --> 00:07:05.600
<v Speaker 1>not fit the standard picture of the delinquent. Their parents

118
00:07:05.639 --> 00:07:08.839
<v Speaker 1>were much better at being able to negotiate successfully on

119
00:07:08.879 --> 00:07:12.759
<v Speaker 1>their behalf. Middle class parents can present themselves as respectable

120
00:07:12.759 --> 00:07:15.959
<v Speaker 1>and reasonable people from a nice neighborhood who look forward

121
00:07:16.000 --> 00:07:19.240
<v Speaker 1>to a rosy future for their child. They promise cooperation

122
00:07:19.600 --> 00:07:22.759
<v Speaker 1>with the juvenile officers, assuring them that their son or

123
00:07:22.839 --> 00:07:27.120
<v Speaker 1>daughter is suitably remorseful and won't commit crime again. As

124
00:07:27.160 --> 00:07:30.800
<v Speaker 1>a result, middle class juveniles are often defined as ill

125
00:07:30.920 --> 00:07:34.040
<v Speaker 1>rather than criminal, as accidentally straying from the path of

126
00:07:34.120 --> 00:07:38.600
<v Speaker 1>righteousness rather than being committed to wrongdoing, as cooperative rather

127
00:07:38.639 --> 00:07:42.040
<v Speaker 1>than irresponsible, as having a real chance of reforming rather

128
00:07:42.040 --> 00:07:44.800
<v Speaker 1>than being a born loser. He or she is typically

129
00:07:45.079 --> 00:07:48.480
<v Speaker 1>counseled and warned and released. Thus, in Siicarel's words, what

130
00:07:48.720 --> 00:07:53.120
<v Speaker 1>ends up as being called justice is negotiable. The third

131
00:07:53.160 --> 00:07:56.240
<v Speaker 1>sociologist that we look at for intractionism is stan Cohen,

132
00:07:56.519 --> 00:08:00.879
<v Speaker 1>and stan Cohen talks about deviancy, amplification, moral panics, and

133
00:08:00.920 --> 00:08:05.120
<v Speaker 1>folk devils. Stan Cohen's study is a classic. He looked

134
00:08:05.160 --> 00:08:08.879
<v Speaker 1>at the two subcultural groups of mods and rockers. The

135
00:08:08.920 --> 00:08:11.839
<v Speaker 1>mods and rockers were very popular during the nineteen sixties

136
00:08:11.879 --> 00:08:15.519
<v Speaker 1>and occasional he had small disturbances on seafronts such as

137
00:08:15.560 --> 00:08:19.199
<v Speaker 1>Brighton Beach or Margate. However, what Cohen noticed is that

138
00:08:19.240 --> 00:08:23.600
<v Speaker 1>the media massively exaggerated what was actually occurring. He refers

139
00:08:23.639 --> 00:08:28.319
<v Speaker 1>to deviancy, amplification, and moral panics, where the media sensationalized

140
00:08:28.360 --> 00:08:31.319
<v Speaker 1>reports of problems between the two groups of mods and rockers.

141
00:08:31.879 --> 00:08:34.679
<v Speaker 1>Cohen's ideas about the social construction of what he calls

142
00:08:34.879 --> 00:08:39.480
<v Speaker 1>folk devils were revolutionary at the time. Therefore, according to Cohen,

143
00:08:39.559 --> 00:08:42.519
<v Speaker 1>what is seen as deviant or criminal depends on how

144
00:08:42.559 --> 00:08:45.720
<v Speaker 1>the media react, how they portray the news, and how

145
00:08:45.720 --> 00:08:48.879
<v Speaker 1>they might sensationalize a certain act and put a blame

146
00:08:48.919 --> 00:08:52.080
<v Speaker 1>on a particular group and therefore scapegoating them or what

147
00:08:52.240 --> 00:08:56.960
<v Speaker 1>Cohen called folk devils. The final sociologist that we look

148
00:08:57.000 --> 00:08:59.919
<v Speaker 1>at is Phillips in Bowling and Phillips and Bowling refers

149
00:08:59.919 --> 00:09:04.440
<v Speaker 1>to racial profiling and self fulfilling prophecies. Phillips and Bowling

150
00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:08.200
<v Speaker 1>have suggested that the police over police ethnic minoritized groups,

151
00:09:08.240 --> 00:09:11.919
<v Speaker 1>particularly black men. This may be based on racial profiling,

152
00:09:12.039 --> 00:09:14.679
<v Speaker 1>which is a process used to determine who is most

153
00:09:14.840 --> 00:09:17.240
<v Speaker 1>likely to commit crime based on the types of people

154
00:09:17.279 --> 00:09:19.240
<v Speaker 1>who have been found to be criminal in the past.

155
00:09:20.000 --> 00:09:22.759
<v Speaker 1>Phillips and Bowling suggests that if only one type of

156
00:09:22.799 --> 00:09:25.440
<v Speaker 1>person is stopped and searched, then only one type of

157
00:09:25.480 --> 00:09:28.080
<v Speaker 1>person will be found to have committed those crimes, hence

158
00:09:28.159 --> 00:09:31.159
<v Speaker 1>leading to a self fulfilling prophecy. This means that the

159
00:09:31.200 --> 00:09:33.799
<v Speaker 1>police find black men to have been more criminal because

160
00:09:33.840 --> 00:09:36.639
<v Speaker 1>the stop and search rates is somewhere between six and

161
00:09:36.759 --> 00:09:41.000
<v Speaker 1>nine times more likely than white men. This disproportionate figure

162
00:09:41.200 --> 00:09:43.399
<v Speaker 1>not only leads to more black men being charged, but

163
00:09:43.480 --> 00:09:46.879
<v Speaker 1>also may lead to a culture of distrust and defiance

164
00:09:46.919 --> 00:09:50.879
<v Speaker 1>within black culture, leading to further arrests. This shows that

165
00:09:50.919 --> 00:09:54.279
<v Speaker 1>the interaction between the police and citizens is not equal,

166
00:09:54.559 --> 00:09:58.480
<v Speaker 1>with some groups attracting more negative labels than others. There are,

167
00:09:58.559 --> 00:10:02.519
<v Speaker 1>of course, many criticisms of the interactionist approach, not just

168
00:10:02.600 --> 00:10:05.240
<v Speaker 1>because they only look at small scale research, but they

169
00:10:05.279 --> 00:10:08.000
<v Speaker 1>do tend to ignore the structures of society and how

170
00:10:08.039 --> 00:10:11.240
<v Speaker 1>these have an impact on us. For example, Marxists would

171
00:10:11.279 --> 00:10:14.320
<v Speaker 1>argue that the structure of capitalism has a huge impact

172
00:10:14.559 --> 00:10:19.200
<v Speaker 1>on crime, and criminality. Likewise, feminist point to patriarchy and

173
00:10:19.320 --> 00:10:22.720
<v Speaker 1>question why is male crime so much higher than female crime.

174
00:10:23.279 --> 00:10:26.039
<v Speaker 1>You could also use new right theory. Murray, for example,

175
00:10:26.080 --> 00:10:29.159
<v Speaker 1>says that you have to consider the problems of underclass

176
00:10:29.559 --> 00:10:34.279
<v Speaker 1>and welfare dependency when trying to understand why crime occurs. Likewise,

177
00:10:34.320 --> 00:10:37.120
<v Speaker 1>you could look at left realists who say that marginalization

178
00:10:37.240 --> 00:10:41.080
<v Speaker 1>has a huge impact on crime and criminality, and right realists.

179
00:10:41.080 --> 00:10:44.279
<v Speaker 1>Wholl also talk about the fact that the environment itself

180
00:10:44.559 --> 00:10:48.200
<v Speaker 1>can lead to increasing crime levels and it's not always

181
00:10:48.240 --> 00:10:51.720
<v Speaker 1>just about the individual. Thank you very much for listening

182
00:10:51.759 --> 00:10:54.120
<v Speaker 1>to this episode. If you've yet to listen to episodes

183
00:10:54.159 --> 00:10:56.559
<v Speaker 1>one to four, then please do go back and listen now.

184
00:10:56.879 --> 00:10:57.759
<v Speaker 1>Thank you.