Social Construction Of Crime Criminology Essay

Social Construction Of Crime Criminology Essay Crime is a term that refers to many types of misconduct that is forbidden by law. There are a number of different reasons as to why crime can be viewed as a social construction. There cannot be social problems that are not the product of social construction naming, labelling, defining and mapping them into place through which we can make sense of them (Clarke, 2001). In this essay I will explain what is social construction, also what crime is, and why we think, that crime is socially constructed. Furthermore, I will explain how media construct crime and the stigma of black crime.   In the last paragraph I will explore the importance of Marxist and Durkheims theories on the emergence of crime. There is no doubt that crime is socially constructed. The constructionist perspective draws on a very different sociological inheritance, one that treats society as a matrix of meaning. It accords a central role to the processes of constructing, producing and circulating meanings. Within this perspective, we cannot grasp reality in a direct and unmediated way Reality is always mediated by meaning (John Clarke p.6). Indeed, some of its proponents argue that what we experience is the social construction of reality (Berger, 1967). How something or someone is named, identified and placed within a map of the social orders has profound consequences for how we act towards it or them (Becker, 1963). Public concern over crime relates mainly to theft and violence, which are regarded as being serious enough to warrant sustained attention from the police. This concern, reflected in periodic moral panics, tends to ensure that many of those who are involved in theft and criminal violence do so as a form of secondary deviation. As a result, many of them develop a criminal identity (Becker, H. S, 1963). The national British crime survey reports have demonstrated that the risk of being victims of crime is shaped by locality, lifestyle, age, gender and ethnicity. BCS confirm that the risk of being a victim of contact crime are highest for men those aged under 30, those living in intercity areas and those living in privately rented accommodation. Noon the less according to the BCS it is frequently those who are least at risk of crime who are most anxious about it, notably older people and women(May et al,2009). The very good example of how crime can be socially constructed is Black Crime (McLaughlin, 264). During the early 1970s indicated, that the media has continued to project an image of Britain as a white society (Hartman 1974). Crime and criminality came to be the central motif that constructed black people as a problem presence, and also signifying that they were not really British (McLaughlin, 264). Gilroy (1987) has added to this by analysing discourses on race, crime and nations. Perceptions of the weakness of black culture and family life, sometimes explained by absence of a father or authority figure, or more crudely, by a lack of respect for the Law and English tradition of civility, served to define black people as lesser breeds without the Law , as the others who stands outside what is meant to be British(Gilroy, 1987). However the significance of the prolonged campaign that led to the inquiry into the murder of Stephen Lawrence cannot be overstated. Dominant representations o f black people as a problem for white British society have been successfully challenged (Murji, 274). The media is the most powerful organisation which does a big impact on social construction of the crime. The importance of the news media in framing the public understanding of social problems is widely recognized (McLaughlin,263). Research in many countries confirms that crime reports are among the most headlines catching of news commodities. It is also suggested that there is broad correspondence between the images of criminality articulated in the news media and the interpretation for this (Murji, 264). Such as media presentation of the information reinforces social construction of the crime (McLaughlin et al, 264). There are three levels of explanation in the study of deviant and criminal behaviour. A first level of explanation is concerned with the existence of the many different forms of human behaviour that occur in any society ( Becker,1963). Biology may contribute towards an explanation of this diversity, but it can never provide the whole explanation. It is always necessary to take account of processes of socialization (Becker, 1963). A second level of explanation is concerned with the variation in norms between social groups, as manifested particularly in cultural and subculture differences ( Becker, 1963). Socialization takes place within particular social groups, and it is the norms of these groups that provide the standards for the identification of particular kinds of behaviour as criminal( Becker, 1963). The third, and final, level of explanation is concerned with the ways in which particular individuals are identified as criminals by others and so come to develop a criminal identit y. This is a matter of social reaction and control ( Becker, H,1963). In addition to understand social construction of crime, it is very important to look back at historical theoretical periods, which plays an important roles in revitalising past discoveries, putting new stress on the interpretation of events and relating these to current happenings(Jock Young, 307). First of all I would like to look at Marxist theory, where he sees crime being endemic in the social order. According to Marxism, men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please: they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directed encountered, given and transmitted from the past (Marx, 1969,p.360). Marxist frameworks have developed a Marxist theory of crime. From Marx perspectives crime is seen largely as the product of capitalism, with criminal and antisocial behaviour indicative of the contradictions and problems inherent in the capitalist system (Marsh, 1997, 519). The basic motivation of capitalism, such as emphasis on materialism and self- enrichment, encourage self-interested, anti-social and, by implication, criminal behaviour (Marsh, 1997, 519). Marxist s argues that business crime is largely ignored by the legal system. There are some well publicized exceptions, but these tend just to reinforce the impression that criminals are mainly from the working classes and that business criminals are not real criminals they are just doing what everyone else does (Marsh,1997,519). Marxist arguments suggest that capitalism produces the conditions that generate criminal behaviour. According to him, crime occurs because of economic deprivation and because of the contradictions that are apparent in capitalist society. Working-class crime is a rebellion against inequality and against the system that uses the legal process- including the Law, the police, courts and prison as weapons in a class war(Marsh, 1997, 522). According to Durkheims crime theory, he points out two arguments on crime growth. The first argument is, that modern industrial urban societies encourage a state of egoism which is contrary to the maintenance of social solidarity and to conformity to Law , and second is, that in periods of rapid social change anomies occurs. By this he meant an anomic disordered society lacking effective forms of social control, and thereby leading to a state of individually perceived normlessness (Frank Heathcote, 347). Durkheim arguments that crime is inevitable and functional does not explain the causes of crime or why certain people are more likely to engage in, criminal activities than others (Frank Heathcote, 348). More recently functionalist theories, based on the notion of there being a general consensus of values and norms, have focused on causes of criminal behaviour. Functionalist theories of crime tend to assume that there is general consensus within society over what is right and wrong behaviour. The interactionist approach questions this assumption; it does not see criminals as essentially different from so called normal people. Many people commit criminal action and it is therefore not easy to maintain a clear distinction between the criminal in terms of particular personal characteristics (Marsh, 1997, 517). To summary, in my essay firstly I discussed that, crime has been seen as a response to the frustration felt by those who cannot achieve the norms or goals of society. Secondly, how dominant representations of black people as problems for white people society have been successfully challenged. Thirdly, that the media is the most powerful organisation which does a big impact on social construction of the crime, and finally I argued two most important theories, which are still in use.

Free Essays - Jocasta is Not to Blame in Oedipus the King (Oedipus Rex) :: Oedipus the King Oedipus Rex

Jocasta is Not to Blame in Oedipus the King          In the play, Oedipus the King , written by Sophocles, it is Oedipus, not Jocasta, that deserves our criticism. Oedipus made some `errors in judgement' that caused him dire consequences and is therefore going to be inevitably condemned for them.       Many could argue that Jocasta is responsible for the downfall that Oedipus encounters due to an unsuccessful attempt to have Oedipus murdered as an infant. It could be said that she therefore deserves our criticism for her actions in the play although we cannot over look the choices the Oedipus makes himself. Oedipus chose to leave Corinth when told the news of the terrible prophecy that had been foretold about him. It was this choice that led Oedipus to kill what he thought to be a wanderer on a foreign road. In leaving Corinth he fulfilled the prophecy to kill his father. It was Oedipus' choice that accounts him responsible for the criticism he eventually endures, not Jocasta.       Oedipus choses to seek the truth about the murderer of Laius, honourably indeed to save the people of Thebes, but through this choice he in a sense administers his own lethal injection. Oedipus is warned about the consequences of his actions by Teresias when he prophesises the outcome of the search for truth. Due to Oedipus' ego which is built up by the pedestal that the people of Thebes have put him on, he does not accept the help of Teresias and continues to search. His opinion of himself being above the Gods leads him to then again shun the help of Jocasta who once again warns him of the consequences of the search for truth. Oedipus' persistence lands him our criticism, at this point we cannot criticise Jocasta as she tries to help him, and warn him about what will happen is he persists.       Although Jocasta tried to murder her son, Oedipus, to save her husband and herself from the terrible prophecy foretold at Oedipus' birth, Oedipus still deserves most of our criticism. He chose to murder another human being, through no fault of Jocasta's. She honourably tried to save her husband by having her son murdered although the person meant to do it couldn't go through with it.

Medusa by Carol an Duffy, Loads of Mistakes. Essay

‘The Worlds Wife’ in which Duffy gives a voice to female characters that may have been ignored throughout history. The poems are presented through the point of view of these women and in many cases it is the first time that we, as an audience hear their side of the story, rather than a story that has been told for them. Medusa matches the other poems in this anthology as Duffy presents Medusa as she sees herself but she is still shed in a negative light, which she willing presents to the reader as she is perversely pleased by it. Duffy uses clever diction and sentence structure to add to the representation of the persona as well as punctuation and techniques, most significantly rule of threes, to effectively display the persona and the themes of growing rage, stone, revenge and self absorption. Duffy wastes no time in jumping into Medusa’s perspective as the first line proves. The poem starts on a bitter note with â€Å"a suspicion, a doubt, a jealously† which is significant for numerous reasons. Firstly, the diction of jealousy alone is important because it suggests the breeding of ill feelings at the start of the poem which reflects how Medusas life as a monster began in much the same way. Also, the rule of three contains nouns that build on each other are progressive as Medusa graduates from a suspicion to as doubt and then becomes jealous, an idea which is also suggested by the caesura of commas rather than full stops, indicating that the nouns flow together and are linked rather than being separate or distinct. The first line is organized in a way that makes the growth of negative feelings evident which foreshadows the growth of rage and hate expressed later in the text while the progressive rule of three effectively foreshadows the continued use of the same technique throughout the poem. The growth of negativity is supported again in the following lines which imply that Medusa’s feelings were so strong as to be represented physically through the turning of the hairs on her head to filthy snakes. The snakes are obviously a tangible representation of the growth which Duffy emphasizes all the more the length of the line. Being longer than ever y of line of the poem is it a clear, visible reflect of the actual growth of the snakes that represent Medusas anger. The first reference to the theme of stone is made in the second stanza, in which the persona describes her lungs as â€Å"grey†, which indicates that Medusa’s lungs that support her life, are hardened, colourless and decayed, replicating her emotions and reflected the effect that she has on living being which is to turn them to stone. While the imagery of the grey lungs suggests lifelessness, it is immediately contrasted by the image of â€Å"yellow fanged† which is a link back to the snakes that are alive and thriving on her head. The combination of the two images suggests that Medusa herself is dead but possesses life because she is fully embodied by the snakes, and everything that they represent, an idea that is backed up by her having yellow fangs as if she is now a snake, not human. Stone is suggested again in the second stanza through the metaphor of â€Å"bullet tears† which relate to the hardness of stone and imply that Medusa’s emotions murder or kill as bullets do, which is evident later on in the poem. The first sense of Medusa’s feeling of self importance are apparent at the end of this stanza with the rhetorical question of â€Å"are you terrified†, suggesting her pride in the monstrosity that she is viewed as and also the fact that it is immediately followed by an answer in the form of a command implies that the actual answer of the man that she is talking to is unimportant and she is indifferent to it which emphasizes her own self importance. However, the man, the â€Å"Greek God† is displayed with some importance, though meager compared to hers, as he manages to catch her eye. It is him that she loves and since he has been special enough to attract the attention of one as high as medusa he should be scared because her attention is one him rather than ignoring him and also that fact that he catches her eye is fitting because it is exactly that that will turn him to stone. The third stanza has a link back to the first in â€Å"I know you’ll go, betray me†. Both suggest Medusa’s lack of trust and bitterness by how easily she passes negative judgment on the man before he has a chance to act as such. This negative outlook may be a partial cause to Medusa’s selfishness, leading her to believe that nothing is worth her time. Her selfishness and lack of caring about even those that she supposedly loves is displayed through the final line in this stanza: â€Å"so better by for me if you were stone. † It is only what is better for her that matters which again puts her, the only moral of the Gorgons, on a pedestal above a Greek God. In the next three stanzas the tone changes from a passive and indifferent statement of facts to an active narration of her deeds that emphasize her rage, especially as she draws particular attention  to her actions. I will look at the following three stanzas collectively as there are techniques spread through them. Medusa’s hate and spite become obvious now and grow rapidly, which links back to the first line with the progressive rule of three. The same technique is used again in these three stanzas though more disjointed than before. The intensity of medusa’s gaze increases in the first line of each stanza form glanced to looked to stared, with is another progressive rule of three as one thing builds on another and it replicates the expansion of her rage through time. The growth of medusas hate is also suggested through the size of the stone that she creates. Starting with a tiny pebble from a bee and progressing to a boulder metaphorically implies that as her hate increases, so too do her destructive powers as the two are directly linked. To support this notion, another progressive rule of three flows through the three stanzas. The way in which the stone drops from the air increases with Medusa’s rage as well with verbs of increasing severity: â€Å"fell, spattered, shattered† which is another clever technique that Duffy uses to emphasize and enforce the previous two points. Now focusing on only the sixth stanza, the verb â€Å"stared’ holds significance aside from the rule of three that it forms; â€Å"stared† again emphasizes medusas opinion of self importance as she spare the animals a mere glace or look both devotes far more time and intensity to herself because she is of more significant. Also, while everything else that she looks at turns to stone, she does not when she stares at herself which implies that she cannot be converted because she is already hard and cold as stone at heart. Following on in the sixth stanza, medusas anger seems to reach its epitome and its colossal size is represented by the imagery of the dragon, fire and the mountain. The three final lines of this stanza can be interpreted in two ways. There is the obvious link to the metamorphosis that takes place between animals and stone in the previous two stanzas which implies that medusa looked at the dragon and made it a mountain. However, unlike the other examples of medusa turning animals to stone, the dragon is separate from the mountain by a full stop where previously it has been a comma. The deliberate change in the punctuation pattern separates the dragon from the mountain while, suggesting that when Medusas stares into the mirror she see that dragon that is herself. If medusa is metaphorically a dragon then the growth of her anger is again insinuated because previously in the poem she was presented as a snake but now towards the end she has grown into a larger and fiercer reptile. While the dragon may be medusa the mountain represents her rage as it is an indication of its massive size while the fire goes to support the implication of raw anger. In stanza 7, the tone again changes back to how it was at the start of the poem with medusa addressing the greek god again. Medusa appears to be justifying her hate towards the man in this stanza by stating that he has a shield for a heart and a sword for a tongue. The metaphors suggest that the man never really loved medusa as she loved him and that he played her, finally hurting her with is words and his betrayal which is why she seeks revenge. Though medusa may blame the man for what she has become, she appears to like herself better the way she is now which is indicated through the last three lines of the poem. A content, menacing and proud tone accompanies look at me now as if medusa likes who she is. Also, since what she is now is contrasted to how she was when she was young, the is a suggestion that while she was young and naive she was ignorant to how she should be, where as now the she is older she knows that she is as she should and thinks highly of herself for it. The importance of what she is now is emphasized by the fact that the line forms a stanza on its own. Through most of the poem, beautiful things are being turned to rigid, lifeless stone which is summed up entirely in the last three lines in which state that medusa made that transformation herself, from beautiful life to death stone, emotionally at least and then she brings the same to others. Finally, the diction of â€Å"look† in the last line is both fitting and ironic because it is that very look that will literally turn you to stone just as she has been metaphorically turned to stone herself. Throughout the poem duffy displays medusa in a way the she has not been seen before. In many instances the man appears to be blamed for what she has become as though it I know fault of her own, though she seem perversely pleased with herself, which, from her perspective, sheds her in a positive light. Although the reader cannot shake the negative connotations that have been developed with medusa it is evident that she thinks very highly of herself, and what do the opinions of other, insignificant, people matter to one who is as self important as medusa?

Essay on Family Relationships in Greek Mythology - 1632 Words

Greek Mythology originated around 775 B.C.E. It all started with Homer’s Iliad and continued on with Hesiod’s Theogany. These were the first two myths to be recorded in Greek Mythology. Both of these myths reveal to us about their understanding of the universe, and about their culture. Not only do they talk about their various gods, and heroes, but they also talk about how they viewed the universe in general (Rosenberg 79). Greek Mythology evolved from two early civilizations, the Mycenaean’s and the Minoans. It was the combining of these different Greek cities and Kingdoms during 10th century B.C. that created Greek Mythology. Its Geographic isolation gave it a place for mythologies to evolve (Gale Virtual Reference Library: Greek†¦show more content†¦However, Uranus was afraid that Cronus might overpower him and one day obtain all his power. Knowing this Uranus purposely tried to kill Cronus in multiply occasions, but Gaea would always protect him. One day Gaea and Cronus made a plan to have Cronus challenge Uranus and take over his power. So it happened, Cronnus challenged his father and was victorious during their battle and Uranus was left to rot (Bernard 1) Now Cronus had become king of gods by killing his father Uranus† (Bernard 3). In both Greek and Roman Mythology, the relationship between parents and children are distorted, strained, and bizarrely transformed, because of their greediness for power and obsessiveness to be better than the other. To begin with, the relationship between parents and their children are distorted, because of their greediness and obsessiveness to be better than the other. In the story of Medea, Medea poisoned her own children, because she wanted to see her husband suffer the way she suffered after he left her. She decided they best way to get revenge is by poisoning her children, this way both their children and Jason’s new wife will die of poisoning and Jason will be left all alone in the world with no one to love him (Rosenberg 204). This clearly shows that the relationship between parents and children is distorted, because Medea was willing to poison her own children to get revenge on her husband. Someone who is even willing to do that is twisted and evil inShow MoreRelatedEssay about Greek and Roman Mythology1513 Words   |  7 PagesGreek and Roman mythology is well know. The people of that time period were passionate about the gods and did everything in their power to please them. Li ke most religions the goal is be like one of the gods in order to achieve good fortune or to gain everlasting life. One of the most interesting characteristics about the Greek and Roman Gods is how the gods are not perfect in that they make the same mistakes that the average human would make. These characteristics were put into place to allow ancientRead MoreComparing Roman And Greek Mythology1354 Words   |  6 Pages Roman Vs. Greek Mythology Roman and Greek mythology are full of complexities. Much of Greek and Roman everyday life revolved around these myths. Many similarities are obvious between Roman and Greek mythology because the Romans borrowed a significant amount of their myths and gods from the Greeks. Although Roman and Greek mythology have a few components in common, they also have many various aspects that cause differences in their cultures. First of all; values, morals, traditionsRead MoreThe Relationships Between Parents and Children in Greek and Roman Myths1422 Words   |  6 Pagesinvolving the relationships between parents and children, Greek and Roman myths show us that at one point in time, incest was considered socially acceptable. Many Greek and Roman myths contain twisted relationships between parents and children. These twisted relationships can be broken into three different categories: mothers and sons that have exceptionally strong bonds, parents that are threatened by their children, and the betrayal of parents or children. Greek and Roman Mythology often employsRead MoreThe Amazons Were A Group Of Warrior Women Who Fought Many Of The Great Greek Heroes1596 Words   |  7 Pagesgreat Greek heroes. They consistently went against what was considered the normal female role and led lives like their male counterparts. Unlike some myths in Greek mythology, the myths that involve the Amazons are spread o ut over time and often have multiple variations of one myth. Myths involving the Amazons even sometimes have versions of the same myth with different Amazon warriors, making it difficult to understand what Amazon women is associated with the certain myth. Throughout Greek mythologyRead More Mythology Essay887 Words   |  4 Pages â€Å"To some extent, mythology is only the most ancient history and biography. So far from being false or fabulous in the common sense, it contains only enduring and essential truth, the I and you, the here and there, the now and then, being omitted. Either time or rare wisdom writes it.† -nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Henry David Thoreau (1849) Every culture has evolved its own mythology, defining its character and offering a way to understand the world. Myths of every culture reveal the powerRead MoreAncient Greek And Greek Mythology Essay865 Words   |  4 PagesAccording to Greek mythology, humans were originally created with four arms, four legs and a head with two faces. Fearing their power, Zeus split them into two separate parts, condemning them to spend their lives in search of their other halves. ― Plato, The Symposium Everybody has naturally experienced love, whether it was for a family member, a friend, a pet, a significant other, or even themselves. But exactly what is love and why does it naturally happen? Though love is an easy word to sayRead MoreGenesis Vs Greek : Families1362 Words   |  6 PagesGenesis vs Greek: Families When most people hear the word â€Å"family† they usually picture the first definition that appears in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary: â€Å"a group of individuals living under one roof†. However, a family can also be defined as â€Å"a group of persons of common ancestry†. Most importantly, family is about the relationships that a group of individuals has with one another, whether they are related by blood or not. The creation story found in Greek culture portrays a completely differentRead MoreEssay Ares: God of War928 Words   |  4 PagesAres, when she hits him in the head with a rock. â€Å"During the Trojan War Ares fought on the side of the Trojans against the Greeks, as a show of support for his lover Aphrodite who had set the war in motion. He charged at Athena who was taunting him about it and she calmly reached down and picked up a rock and smashed him over the head with it, stopping his advance.†(Ares: Greek God of War.) Obviously Ares canâ⠂¬â„¢t even hold his own against his sister, when he is the god of war and should be able to defeatRead MoreGreek Gods and Goddess875 Words   |  4 PagesThe Greek Gods: Ancient vs. Modern Views According to ancient Greek mythology the Greek gods and goddesses had at one time lived the savage, brutal and ugly life of humans. Eventually, however, they managed to rise above this ancient fierceness to become the nineteen elder gods and goddesses the Greeks knew as The Titans, who ruled the earth in a primordial era before the Olympian gods overthrew them. The ancient Greeks of the first millennium before the Christian era believedRead MoreMythology Film Review (Percy Jackson)1014 Words   |  5 Pages and his quest to discover both who he is and who stole the mighty lightning bolt of Zeus. The film is aimed at families, and generally shows an accurate representation of the Greek myths. There are a few key differences though, which are mostly used to present the Greek Gods in a better, more likable tone for the movie. The first differences between the film and classic mythology surround the premise. The film explains that the Gods would occasionally fall in love with mortals and have children