Impact of the labelling perspective on criminological theory

Impact of the labelling perspective on criminological theory Q3: By drawing upon the insights of Symbolic Interactionism, the labelling perspective highlights the importance of how people respond to events and the manner in which responses shape self-perceptions. Discuss, with particular reference to the impact of the labelling perspective on criminological theory. Labelling perspective has negative and positive impact on society and individual. Labelling perspective and symbolic interactionism are inter-depended theories. They represent a few theories where it is often categorized as social reaction theory where it focuses on societys reaction towards the deviant and not the person of deviant. Its the sociology of deviancy. However, the labelling theorists state that their theory never cause criminality directly but they elaborate the situation around the criminals and the possibilities of their criminal occurrence. It is called sociology of deviancy. Labelling came up to UK only in 1960s from Europe from the influence of Elvis Presley and rock n roll culture. Here Frederick Thrasher has quoted in his juveline gangs that official labeling gives a negative impact on youths. Later on the issue of the labeled person will be and behave according to the description was brought about by Frank Tannenbaum (1938). Interactionist theory is of that a persons life is influenced by those being interacted even though the culture, family background and genetics has influence on ones life. So the interactions could influence ones lifestyle through symbolizing and labeling him. Labeling perspective focuses on society and individual. Lemert says that problem arises when individual is labeled and he identifies the label. Becker says that the society determine the rule for criminality and deviance. It is applied to those who disobey those rules and labeled as criminals. So those who are labeled are alienated from society. A few issues has to be look thoroughly as in how the person of labeled being analysed, the reaction to the label, whats the affect in the circle they live, whether the labeling has changed their self image. First of all, it has to be clearly seen, what are the behaviours that is catogarized as criminals. The usage of officials in power on labeling and whats the effect that it has on individual ? Labelling would give a person negative impact internally which affects his behaviour. Becker however disagreed that labelling perspective had caused deviance. It does not mean ones he steals, he would steal again. According to him, the internal changes to an offender are due to the people and to whom they interact to. However there was also idea brought about by Matsueda that a persons own view of himself is affected due to the way others treat and view them. This is shows it is an impact of labelling. Labelling perspective is divided into two; primary deviance and secondary deviance. First ones is of a person who had break the norm and rules yet is not bothered of the labelled that has been stamped on his by the officials or society. This is done through justification of the crime They are those who does not react to the societal reaction of labelling. Theorists also say that these people are falsely labelled. This obviously does not mean that the offender is innocent but he had disagreed to accepts the fact that the act is criminal and he is a criminal. Society disapproves his behaviour and categorize as less-worthy ones. Yet the offender does not bother of the label. However, the negative impact of the labelling is that it might turn the offender into the form that he had been labelled by the society. The latter ones, secondary deviance is of a behaviour that is due to social reaction and self image. Yet theorists say that labelling is the sole cause for all. Here the labelling is done by the prison, people of power such as police and similar institutions. The society determines the label on the individuals by looking at the people of powers reaction. The labelled ones are viewed differently in the society. The impact this; some will accept the label and some has no idea of what is his image and just accept the label. The image is brought about to one by the social interaction is negative impact. Theorist of opinion that labelling by officials does not give much impact to individuals but the stigmatisation from the society which he is belong to or respect. If the society knows about the label, it will affect the way people treat them. Usually criminal label is an overriding label. For example, the manager currently labelled as a thief. The labelled would think he is a thief more compared to he is a manager. So this does not only give a negative impact to the individual but the society. They would start to reject the presence of the labelled among them. The labelling negatively impacts his career as in his refusal to continue working due to the label. Society sees the labelled as less worthy than others of society. The labelling goes on negatively for the offender even in the society, friends, relatives and law abiding society. At last when everyone segregates them, they force themselves to be in the companion of other law breakers who accept them. Here even the innocent labelled person will learn new crimes and criminal values as part of association with them. The drug user who is eliminated from society now will indulge in other crimes as well. If they do once, they may repeat is the term police solely rely on, where it worsen the criminality when they charge the offenders when a crime similar to what occurred earlier in the particular area. The word may will lead those action and reactions unavoidable. Though some offenders will realize the mistakes done and get back to the normal life. It is still argued that the labelling internalised the individuals and criminality arises due to the social reaction to them. The worst impact created by labelling perspective is through prison. It is a dorm for the offenders to learn new crimes and increase the level of criminality as they are alienated from the society. These offenders just accept the label of criminal without hesitation while in prison as they believe they are unable to change the label. So this provokes them to commit more crime on their release. Clearly, that the labelling had give a negative impact as in increasing the crime rate. However the positive impact do arise as in some of offenders will not accept the label as their actions were not genuinely criminal and some would try to lead a normal life and not reoffend again. Whatever their reasons may be, but the society are not ready to accept them in the society due to the stigmatisation. The negative impacts of labelling continue as in the name of ex-prisoner. He faces the problem of getting a job, acceptance into society and police surveillance. Though he had moved out of the label of criminal, the society refuses to accept him in their community. Theorists had been arguing that the process of labelling would lead to criminality is the same as of social control to law abiding society. The labelling and control would lead to one to redefine himself and accept the labels. The impact of labelling is not only on individuals but groups. One group label the other as deviant will make the other ones alienated from the society. More crime is done by the group when the excluders block their social interactions. Current crime shows they have accepted the label and is not bothered of it. Controlling and labelling has created a malicious circle for the criminals. Young commented on a marijuana issue which involves Marijuana Tax Act 1937 where the labelling of media has worsened the criminality. They are negatively labelled where more control from police is provided. It made the offenders treated injustice and wanted to revenge back by acting against the intolerant society. This is criminality increases in society due to labelling. Labelling is not of is not a theory of causation but of interpreting what happens. It is not that the labelling create certain type of behaviours but rather they and their effects may lead any offenders to choose one of it as a path for criminality. Though these explanations is not strong enough to satisfy the accusation of labelling has a negative impact, in theory and practical it has always been viewed as a non causative theory. Next is an offender is classed negatively without thinking the act is actually could be treated as normal. This makes the offender suffer as a victim as his moral element of the act is eliminated. This is due to the labelling of the authority as only law is seen but moral values and the genuine factor in committing the act. The effect of labelling is at times unpredictable as in cases of arrest in domestic violence. (Sherman) where employed persons avoid the act further but those of unemployed found to act in more violent due to arrest which has made them being labelled. It does not withstand an empirical testing. It could convey social and sometimes of political message. The social reaction leads to the difficulty in testing the level of criminality. It is already a problem even before the label is official. Results are ambiguous in the attempts of testing. Labelling is actually a system of capitalism. It ignores the impact and political importance where it is against radical criminology. As this while the labelling perspective is seen in negative manner, so John Braithwaite has brought about the positive application using the theory above which is called reintegrative shaming. Positive impacts are to be created using this. The main idea of this is to make the labelled person realise of their mistake and effects that it has created. At the same time, it is for the society to forgive the offenders mistake and accept them back into the society. The idea is done in a process of two ways, firstly the offender need to be confronted in front victim. Secondly, the process is done in front of the offenders family or those considered important in his life as they are to make him to be accepted in the society. These ideas of Braithwaite claimed be able to give positive impacts as actually the real idea behind any reparation and caution plus is for the offenders to admit the guilt and ask for forgiveness from the victim. this is an excellent idea for the intention above as it has been vastly used in New Zealand Morris, Australia-Strang , Forsythe, and some parts of America-Alford. This had also been used widely in Britain with Crime and Disorder Act 1998 had been widely used as part of reparation Maxwell and Morris, Dignan, Young and Goold. Reintergrative shaming is actually an early cautioning for the offenders as of like in situations of warning, reprimand, take decision of bail decisions, before reports are prepared, part of sentencing, decision as to release and post-release intervention. this is actually a great way to reduce white collar crimes and corporate violations of law (Simpsons). With this some could escape from being convicted even at the early stage. Labelling does create a turning point for the offenders from committing further crimes and mistakes. Labelling theory has been a guideline for many to stay away from crimes and criminal actions. The process of avoiding the interactions with the labels would make the law-abiding society prevented from acting out the criminality. (Vold and Bernard). Especially for those who are young and new offenders. Police could handle the offenders off the criminal justice system as labelling is easily done through society. The official cautioning does not make out of official control but it gives him a second chance to come out of the stigmatisation. So community service and probation are introduced. This allows them to be away from incarceration and reduce the stigma and labelling. However, there had been complains that this are not effective as the rate of people being incarcerated have not reduced. So those who are being punished now are those who had been labelled earlier. It shows the labelling had not brought any good impact as said. Conclusion, it is not because of the way society views had increase the criminality and bad behaviour but the focus of media and officials which had turn into it. Though the action taken was not harsh but the reaction given to it had made the offenders internalise the labelled self image. Its concluded that the labelling perspective is to create awareness of the existence of this criminality and not for the benefit of individual. So in acting out the task, it does bring more negative impact rather than positive to the individual.

Dr. Faustus Essay: Faustus Changing Relationship with the Audience

Doctor Faustus' Changing Relationship with the Audience Any good drama will have interesting and multi-faceted characters; some go a step further by developing some of those characters throughout the story, using the events of the plot to change them in various ways. The audience (in the case of a play) follows the characters throughout, watching as they move away from their originally crafted personalities and become something different. Naturally, during this period, the audience's opinion of the characters will change, as will their sympathies. In the case of Doctor Faustus, it is only Faustus' character that has a large enough part in the play to change perceptibly; the other characters are either incidental characters, existing purely for the sake of the plot and ongoing story (in particular, most of the characters from the middle section of the play, from the scenes that take place in the courts of Rome and Germany), or mythological characters, such as Mephostophilis, who are traditional 'morality play' characters and, consequently, are constrained by their accepted dramatic roles. The character of Faustus, however, changes greatly throughout the play, mainly with regard to his opinions of hell and repentance. Perhaps more important than the changes his character undergoes are the situations in which he finds himself: the audience's shifting sympathy is due as much to his personal developments as well as his changing circumstances. At he very beginning of the play, we are introduced to Faustus in a very clinical, objective fashion. In the Prologue, the Chorus briefly describes his past and then hints about the events to come ("His waxen wings did mount above his reach, / And, melting, heavens conspir'd his o... ...hip between Faustus and the audience, as he fully accepts his own mistake and does not blame it solely on Lucifer or his parents or any other person. Scene XX serves to remind us that Faustus was once a normal human being and that he will end his life, after a fashion, as a human being, as the scholars vow to "give his mangled limbs due burial". At various times during the play we are exasperated by Faustus, endeared to him, laugh with him and, at the end, we feel great pity for him. It is to Marlowe's great credit that he manages to take us on such a long journey with the character and gain our sympathy at the end, despite Faustus effectively being an agent of evil. Works Cited: Marlowe, Christopher. "The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus." The Norton Anthology of English Literature. 6th ed. Eds. M.H. Abrams et. al. New York: W.W. Norton and Co, 1993.

Diversity in America Essay

Diversity in america is a trademark of the beauty in our country. Without diversity, America wouldn’t be what it is today. A country that is an obvious reflection of the multiple cultures it contains. The rise and struggle of the African-Americans, The Spanish, Asian, and European immigrants who have all come to the U.S. and contributed to a diverse country. Chinese resturaunts, Soccer, Spanish music, There are so many diverse things that we love. With myself being a part of the Diverse community, it has shown me that being different doesn’t matter. Whether you’re Black, White, or Guynease, anyone can be accepted and become a good friend. In my parents home country of Guyana, the diversity is limited and its shows as they still live as if they are in the 90’s. Being as diverse as the United States has its challenges, races don’t always get along, there is always a feeling of prejudice, and stereotypes put fake labels on people. These challenges can’t always be always be solved it’s up to the people to Be more open minded. Langston Hughes faced a great amount of racism in his days, he had this to say, â€Å"I learned very early in life that our race problem is not really of black against white, and white against black. It’s a problem of people who are not very knowledgeable, or who have small minds, or small spirits.† This quote from hughes tells it all. The benefits from being such a diverse country outweigh the bad, being so diverse means many different people who have different interest and lifestyles. This presents a society where people of all different races are friends and learn from one another. The climate of acceptance in the U.S. is very high, i feel a haitian or cuban immigrant can come to the U.S. and be welcomed and ultimately succeed in this country. This is done by eliminating any racial exceptions and qualifications. Limiting Prejudice is no easy task for any country, there is no law you can put in place to stop it. Ultimately the people have to be educated and told that prejudice is just a factor that exists in your mind to create doubt. They have to know that races are not what many people may perceive. The appreciation for diversity in this country comes from the appreciation of the friends we have made who celebrate their diverse holidays that we too should embrace and the ways of other people and their culture. I happen to already know that our country does appreciate the diversity here and wouldn’t want to see it go and become one-sided. I hold myself to not being prejudice and being accepting, I like to learn of other cultures every once in awhile and be inclusive. All in all, Diversity is an important part of our society and it is a benefit to our country.

Was Shylock A Victim Or A Villain - 1719 Words

The late sixteenth century play ËÅ"The Merchant of Venice, one of Shakespeares more popular comedies, is one that is portraying various peoples lives throughout Venice and Belmont. During the course of the play there is a concentration of thoughts and emotions towards the character Shylock, a Jewish usurer, this is the very character that we shall be concentrating the question in the title on. In most scenes the character Shylock has to deal with a lot of racial discrimination, which has at modern times become unacceptable to most people. Elizabethan society was largely anti-Semitic and as such the audience would have been unsympathetic towards his character. In addition to their anti-Semitic ways they also had a strong dislike of†¦show more content†¦This speech would seem to be so drastic as Shylock is being put through a very hard time seeing as his own daughter has run of with a Christian by the name of Lorenzo, this has outraged Shylock not only because of the fact tha t she is seeing a Christian but because she has also stolen money from him when she left; Of double ducats , stoln from me by my daughter (Act: 2 Scene: 8 Line: 19) We learn about Shylocks losses in this scene being of his daughter and of his money, but we do not learn it from Shylock we get it from Solanio, and in a lot of scenes we actually get to build up a picture of his character when he is not present in the scene. In scene one of the third act Shylock learns from, Tubal, a fellow Jewish businessman that Antonios fleet has suffered ill fortune at sea. Tubal also tells Shylock that one of the sailors had a ring of Jessica, which she swapped for a monkey; One of them showed me a ring that he had of your daughter for a monkey. (Act:3 Scene:1 Lines:112-3) Upon this point we learn that Shylock may have once been a passionate man and perhaps he even still is as he quotes that the ring was given to him by his wife now thought to be dead. Shylock says that he would not have parted wit h the ring for a wilderness of monkeys; Out upon her Thou torturest me, Tubal: it was my turquoise; I had it of Leah when I was a bachelor: I would not have given it for a wildernessShow MoreRelatedThe Merchant of Venice1028 Words   |  5 PagesSociety tends to define people as being either victims or villains due to the actions, beliefs and decisions present in their lives. In the Merchant of Venice, this separation between those good and evil is existent in the Venetian community, especially for the character of Shylock. Although one may think that Shylock is a victim in this play, as a result of other’s wrong-doing, Shylock is rather a villain because he conspired to kill Antonio through his bond, wished to see his daughter dead forRead MoreShylock in William Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice Essay1128 Words   |  5 PagesShylock in William Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice I am a Jew a famous saying from Shylock in Merchant of Venice that clarifies the merchant brotherhood of a wealthy city. Merchant of Venice contains rascals and heroes. The audiences will soon realise that Shylock, the Jewish money lender, is shown as a villain within the wealthy city. Is this really what Shakespeare had intended? This testimony given proposes that Shylock is more of a deceitful character Read MoreThe Merchant of Venice: Is Shylock a Villain or a Victim? Essay846 Words   |  4 PagesIn this essay I will try to discover is Shylock a villain or a victim, in the William Shakespeare play â€Å"The Merchant of Venice† It is difficult to say if Shylock is a complete villain or a victim, as his character is complex and ambiguous. However, it is difficult to view Shylock as anything other than a devious, bloodthirsty and heartless villain in the majority of the play. There are a few points in the story where he can be viewed as victimised, as most Jews were at that time, but ShakespeareRead MoreEssay The Merchant of Venice Shylock Villain or Victim777 Words   |  4 PagesShylock, Villain or victim? The Merchant of Venice June 8th, 2011 In the play The Merchant of Venice Shylock is supposed to be the protagonist, the definition of protagonist is; the leading character or a major character in a drama, movie, novel, or other fictional text. But the way Shylock is portrayed is more along the lines of being both victim and villain. Shylock is out for one pound of Antonio’s flesh which will in the end kill Antonio and the flesh will do him no good anyway. But heRead MoreIs Shylock The Villain Or Victim In The Merchant Of Venice By William Shakespeare1411 Words   |  6 PagesCharacter Analysis Shylock Is Shylock the villain or the victim in the Merchant of Venice? In the play the ‘Merchant of Venice’ by William Shakespeare the antagonist Shylock is both the victim and the villain. Shylock is a Jewish moneylender and is initially portrayed as anger filled and bloodthirsty but as the play continues we begin to see him as more human and his emotions become more evident. As the antagonist, Shylock is a fearful adversary to Antonio, the protagonist. But as good begins toRead MoreThe Character of Shylock as a Victim or Villain in The Merchant of Venice1527 Words   |  7 PagesThe Character of Shylock as a Victim or Villain in The Merchant of Venice Do you consider the character of shylock to be a victim or villain in the play The Merchant of Venice? Shylock is one of the most interesting, memorable and debated characters in the play â€Å"The Merchant of Venice†. In many ways this is because he is both a victim and a villain. Shylock was made a laughing stock of and is ridiculed by the Christians because he was Jewish. The Jewish communityRead MoreShylock in William Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice1694 Words   |  7 PagesShylock in William Shakespeares The Merchant of Venice Introduction One of the most interesting and dramatic characters in ‘The Merchant of Venice’ is the rich, despised money-lending Jew Shylock. It is impossible to judge Shylock’s character by our own modern Standards, simple because Shakespeare wrote this play for play goers in Elizabethan times. This was very different to modern times for two reasons. Firstly, people watching the play would not find itRead MoreAnalysis of The Merchant of Venice Essay513 Words   |  3 Pages============ Shylock is perhaps the most noteworthy character. He is centred on most of the plays events. Throughout the play he is portrayed as both a villain and a victim and is used to emphasise a number of the plays themes such as greed, revenge, prejudice and racism. The play begins with Antonio, the merchant of the plays title, being unable to repay a bond he had taken on behalf of his friend Bassanio, to the Jewish moneylender Shylock. The bond stated thatRead MoreWilliam Shakespeare s Merchant Of Venice1325 Words   |  6 PagesMalicious Intentions All movies, plays and stories have a victim and a villain in the story. The victim is forced to overcome obstacles and is often hurt physically and emotionally while the villain is the one who wreaks havoc and tries to stop the victim from achieving their goal. In the play Merchant of Venice by William Shakespeare there is a character so elaborate and confusing that an argument could be made that he is both. This character, Shylock, suffers from persecution and humiliation for beingRead MoreThe Merchant of Venice: Film vs Script Essay851 Words   |  4 Pagestracing back the early roles of Shylock done in the Elizabethan stage, we are able to appreciate the complexity of Shakespear’s character, Shylock, and how he has the greatest impact than any other character. In the early Elizabethan era Shylock was portrayed as an archetypical Jew of that time. He would be played by the performer wearing a red wig and large false nose. This look created the foundations of Shylock’s personality during the Elizabethan era; a comic villain not to be taken seriously or