THE EFFECTS OF LABELLING

What do you call a chav in a box

INIT

What do you call an Eskimo chav in a box

INUINIT

INUITS of Canada

INUITS of Canada

• Lemert investigated the longstanding problem of chronic stuttering or stammering among the Inuits

• He argued that this is caused by the overemphasis on ceremonial speech making

• Failure to speak well is a source of shame and humiliation

• Children with the slightest speech difficulty became overanxious because of peer group and parental expectation

• This anxiety made the situation worse and led to chronic stuttering, in other words public labelling turned a minor problem into a major one

Primary and secondary deviance

• Edwin Lemert (1972) makes the distinction between primary and secondary deviance.

• Primary deviance refers to acts which have not been publically labelled. Isolated, relatively insignificant rule-breaking

• Secondary deviance refers to acts which have been publically labelled as deviant and to the defiance which is generated by this labelling. the construction of deviant identity as a result of social REACTION to the initial act.

LEMERTPrimary devianceTo Lemert it is pointless to seek the causes of primary deviance because it is so widespread that it is unlikely to have a single cause, and in any case it is often trivial. For example fare dodging which often goes unpunished. Offenders often rationalise their wrong-doing with justifications like ‘everyone else is doing it’ or ‘I had a moment of madness’ or ‘laws are there to be broken’.....

LEMERT

Primary devianceTherefore acts of primary deviance have little or no bearing on the individual’s status or self-concept.In essence primary deviants do not generally see themselves as deviant.

LEMERT

Secondary devianceThe problem is of course when the deviance is labelled, and some deviance is always labelled by society.Secondary deviance is the result of societal REACTION (which is what labelling is of course).

LEMERTSecondary devianceBeing caught and publically labelled as a criminal or deviant can involve being stigmatised, shamed, humiliated, shunned or excluded from mainstream society. Others may come to see that person only in terms of the label.This becomes their MASTER STATUS or controlling identity overriding all others.

LEMERTSecondary devianceIn the eyes of the world the person is no longer a colleague, father, or neighbour...that has changed into thief, criminal, gangster, druggie....in other words an OUTSIDER.This can provoke a crisis for the individual’s self-concept or sense of identity. This may be resolved by acceptance of the deviant label so the individual comes to see themselves as the world sees them – the SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECY. Now the individual acts out or lives up to the deviant label causing further deviance.

LEMERTSecondary devianceLemert refers to the further deviance which results from acting out the label as SECONDARY DEVIANCEIn this theory then deviant identities are then created and constructed through INTERACTIONS between social control agents (e.g. the police) and suspects.

Divide you into 4 groupsJunkie Paedo Area seen as

deviant or criminal e.g. Camp Hill in Nuneaton, The Bronx in New York….

Chav

CAN WE BE REALLY CLEVER AND LINK THE LABELLING PROCESS IN THESE CASES TO

• Lemert’s distinction between primary and secondary deviance• Societal reaction?• Actions of social control agents like the police• Self-fulfilling prophecy?• Master status?

Studies by William Chambliss, Jock Young.How can we link this evidence to:

• Lemert’s notion of a distinction between primary and secondary deviance – where is the primary deviance and secondary deviance?

• Societal reaction?• Labelling?• Self-fulfilling prophecy?• Master status?

Labelling Theory challenges traditional theories but turning traditional ideas on their head

• Why is some behaviour defined as criminal or deviant in some contexts but not on others?

• Why are some individuals or groups more likely to be defined as deviant?

• How do the responses of the agencies of social control effect individuals future actions?

Societal reaction

• The reaction of society-the way others react to someone labelled as deviant-may have a dramatic effect on that person’s status and identity and may lead to further deviant acts.

• Jock Young’s (1971) study of hippie marijuana users in Notting Hill during the 1960s illustrates this process.

A Based on this stereotype,

the police start to act against hippies to control marihuana use.   

  B The hippies develop a

deviant self-concept, including distinctive clothes and long hair.  

  C A common stereotype of

drug-takers is established by the mass media.  

         

D Police arrest more hippies

on drug charges.  

  E A fantasy crime wave has

been produced because of the increase in arrests for drug-taking. 

  F The drug squad now

become involved in further arrests of hippies for drug-taking.  

         

G This reinforces the police

stereotype and leads to more persecution of the hippies.  

  H The police share this

common stereotype of hippies and label them as deviant.  

  I Hippies use marihuana as

a peripheral part of their lifestyle.

          

J Drug-taking now becomes a

central activity for the hippy culture. 

  K The hippies respond to

this action by retreating into a small isolated group, excluding others.  

   

Jock Young Deviancy Amplification Spiral• C or I → C or I • → H • →A • → K • → G • → B • → D • → J • → F • → E

Becker There is nothing intrinsically criminal about any act, it only

becomes so when the label is tagged to it.‘deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label’

• Becker – saw the labelling process as creating criminal careers. The reaction of society is crucial here - The way others react to someone labelled as deviant may have a dramatic effect on that person’s status and identity and may lead to further deviant acts:

• Societal reaction• Labelling• Self-fulfilling prophecy – the prediction becomes the truth• Master status - status which overrides all other statuses.

LABELLING THEORYThe work of Lemert and Young illustrate the idea that it is not the act itself, but the hostile SOCIETAL REACTION by the social audience that creates serious deviance.Ironically therefore the social control processes that are meant to produce law-abiding behaviour may in fact produce the very opposite.Note the last concluding line in Chambliss’s study The Saints and the Roughnecks“….One lesson is inescapable: The less the intervention in the minor crimes of juveniles the better off they and society will be.”

FREE WILL / NOT DETERMINSTICLabelling theorists are well aware that they can be accused of being deterministic (those labelled will inevitably become more criminal and/or deviant) and that their theories might offer a form of excuse for nasty crime. That is why they are keen to stress that there is nothing inevitable about the labelling process. Downes & Rock (2003) argue that we can never predict whether someone who has been labelled will follow a deviant career because they are always free not to deviate furtherTASK: write down two ways in which a person might resist, reject or throw off a label