Assess the view that traditional socialisation is the main influence on patterns of offending amongst males.

This essay will explore the view that traditional socialisation is the main influence on patterns of offending amongst males. It will first outline key sociological theories concerning the role of socialisation in shaping masculine behaviour, including the concept of hegemonic masculinity and the pressure to prove masculinity. It will then consider evidence from research, exploring how these socialisation processes might lead to criminal behaviour. Finally, the essay will critically evaluate this view, considering alternative explanations for patterns of offending such as subcultural theories, postmodern approaches, and Marxist perspectives.

AO1: Knowledge and Understanding

Traditional socialisation refers to the process by which individuals learn the norms, values, and behaviours expected of them within their society. For males, this process often involves the internalisation of "hegemonic masculinity" - a dominant model of masculinity that emphasizes traits such as strength, aggression, and dominance. This model has been argued to be particularly influential in shaping patterns of offending among males.

Messerschmidt argues that men are socialised into a sense of "masculine dominance" which can lead them to engage in crime. He suggests that men are pressured to prove their masculinity through acts that demonstrate their strength, control, and autonomy. These pressures can lead to "hypermasculinity", where men display exaggerated forms of aggressive and violent behaviour. This idea is supported by Mosher, who argues that men who are insecure about their masculinity may turn to crime to compensate for perceived weaknesses.

Baird highlights the importance of socialisation spaces in the development of masculine identities. He argues that access to traditional masculine spaces, such as sports clubs or gangs, can provide opportunities for boys to learn and practice dominant masculine behaviours. Conversely, a lack of these spaces can lead to the development of alternative, potentially deviant, forms of masculinity.

Winlow highlights the role of "new masculine careers" in shaping patterns of offending. He argues that, in a context of economic decline and a crisis of masculinity, some men turn to criminal activities, such as drug dealing, as a means of achieving traditional masculine markers of success, such as wealth, power, and status.

AO2: Application

The above theories suggest that traditional socialisation processes can directly influence patterns of offending amongst males. These processes can lead to a sense of pressure to conform to dominant masculine norms, which can then be manifested in criminal behaviour. For example, men who are socialised into believing that they must be dominant and aggressive may be more likely to engage in violent crime. Likewise, men who are excluded from traditional masculine spaces may feel pressured to prove their masculinity through alternative, potentially criminal, means.

AO3: Analysis and Evaluation

While there is evidence to suggest that traditional socialisation can influence patterns of offending amongst males, it is important to note that this is not the only factor at play. A number of other theoretical perspectives offer alternative explanations for criminal behaviour.

Subcultural theories, such as those proposed by Cloward and Ohlin, Cohen, and Miller, suggest that crime is a product of the social and economic conditions of certain groups. These theories argue that crime is a way for individuals to achieve status and belonging within a particular subculture. For example, Cohen's theory of "status frustration" suggests that working-class youth, who are denied opportunities for success in mainstream society, may turn to delinquency as a way of gaining status and recognition among their peers.

Postmodern perspectives, such as those of Katz and Lyng, offer a different understanding of crime. They argue that crime is not simply a means to an end, but is also a form of "moral self-transcendence" or "edgework". For example, Katz suggests that some crimes are committed for the thrill and excitement they provide, while Lyng argues that young males often engage in risky behaviour, such as delinquency, as a way of seeking out a sense of "edgework".

Marxist theories also offer alternative explanations for crime. They argue that crime is a product of the capitalist system, which creates inequality and social exclusion. Wilson argues that the economic context of capitalist society, which excludes working-class males from opportunities, can lead to anti-social behaviour.

In conclusion, while traditional socialisation processes can certainly play a role in shaping patterns of offending amongst males, it is not the only factor at play. Other factors, such as social and economic conditions, subcultural influences, and individual motivations, all contribute to the complex phenomenon of crime. Therefore, it is important to avoid oversimplifying the issue and to consider a range of different perspectives when trying to understand the causes of crime.