Gangs from Different Sociological Perspectives and theories Essay Example

that they believe can merely come from selling and administering drugs to acquire the power they crave. This would ensue in category battle from the packs with lower category, and other people with higher category ; get the better ofing the suggestion that `` Lessening privilege will take down the degree of struggle and increase entire human public assistance '' ( Brym and Lie 10 ) . Alternatively of decreasing and take downing struggle, more is created by pack force. Marx would label packs in the subsidiary group, seeking to obtain the place and power to be in the dominate group. Gangs are portion of working category for person of the dominate group, lending to the wealth of Capitalists.

Max Weber would see packs as one of the many societal classes/status groups out at that place ( unlike Marx, who believed there were merely two sorts of groups: the working and capitalist groups ) . Weber believed that non merely does power play a function in society ; it besides played an of import portion in faith, political relations, ethnicity, and gender. Weber would likely believe of packs and interrupt them down into smaller groups, groups based on their faith, gender, etcaˆ¦ . He 'd believe of these smaller groups as major participants in society, because he believed they all possessed different grades of societal power. In those groups there would be people of higher power ( like pack Godheads ) , and in the groups of pack Godheads there would be the more feared pack Godheads as the 1s highest in power and societal position.

Functionalist Perspective

Functionalist position society as a societal system of interrelated parts,

and they examine society through a functional model which stresses that everything in society serves a intent ( Bohm, R.M. 2001 ) . It does n't count how incorrect, right, unusual, good, bad, or even violent something is - functionalist would see that `` something '' as functioning a intent. They believe that engineering progresss and population growing leads to societal alteration.

As for packs, functionalists would probably see them as helpful citizens in society, because they serve a intent. The easy entry into the packs decreases the sum of poorness in society ( no affair how little ) . The growing rate of hapless people slowly additions each twelvemonth, and with packs taking being a money devising concern ; the hapless has someplace to travel ( and do money at the same clip ) .

Functionalists will besides indicate out that packs are at that place for the intent to supply occupations to people like: attorneies, constabulary officers, condemnable research workers, and so on. If there were n't any packs so most police officers would n't hold employment in their chosen Fieldss. The ground lies in the fact that packs are a immense portion of offense. If there were n't any packs doing mayhem, the offense rate would drop because packs cause a good per centum of force. If the offense rate bead, the employment for lawgivers would decidedly diminish.

Emile Durkheim would explicate that packs and aberrance is normal, and they are found in all societies. He would see packs as a portion of society that promotes societal integrity, rethink social norms, and challenges the manner things are now. In other words, packs force society to

rethink their old norms ( societal solidarity ) and come up with newer 1s.

Robert Merton, on the other manus, preferred the in-between scope theory instead than the expansive theory. Merton would likely stress the fact that packs map with manifest and latent maps. The manifest map of how packs ( the histrions ) sell drugs to do a life shows a mark that the histrions are witting of their purposes. The latent map of selling drug to do money ( the action ) may non to the full explicate the action continues to be performed. The histrions might non be consciously cognizant of the concealed grounds that they perform said actions.

Feminist Perspective

Feminists believe that society is based on dissension between the sexes ( females and males ) . They believe that work forces have more power in society and that adult females merely have the small power ( if any ) , because they are at a disadvantage. Feminists use both micro and macro graduated tables of analysis. Their chief focal point is on patriarchate, which is their belief that society is entirely male dominated. They besides want to happen equality in both sexes in societal, political, and economic agencies.

Feminists will most likely review packs as a male dominated organisation and will allow their sentiments known and seek to alter it. They will likely detect and inquiry to themselves, `` Why are at that place more work forces than adult females in packs? '' Their first program of action would be to demo and explicate how of import adult females are in society. Second, they would do an illustration of how adult females have ever

been low-level to the work forces laterality in society for old ages. From there they will go on on their quest to convey about equality in packs. I do n't believe it would count if packs are felons to society, women's rightists would merely look at the fact that the adult females are scarce and about nonexistent.

In their sentiments, adult females have merely every bit much as a right to fall in any organisation they want, if a adult male is making the same. It would n't count to them if a female joined or non, they merely want the option unfastened for adult females every bit good.

Some feminist theories were in understanding with one another, but of class there were little differences in belief. For case, broad feminism believed that the job to inequality between work forces and adult females was caused by male chauvinist. Liberals believed that the jurisprudence was sexist and the manner females and males socialized with each other. They thought that the lone manner to do females equal to adult male, was to ostracize all sexist jurisprudence and the socialisation between work forces and adult females should alter. If we socialized otherwise, the result of the socialisation would convey greater good. Liberals would hold to allow adult females fall in a pack to pass on and with one another in close scenes.

Extremist women's rightist believed that adult females were exploited by patriarchal society and work forces. It was known that some extremist women's rightists thought the best solution to halt the inequality, was to divide both sexes so that they would populate apart. They saw separation as the key to

avoid the state of affairs every bit best as they could. Groups would believe that adult females would make right to non fall in packs, for the exclusive ground of dividing themselves from work forces.

Marxist Feminist believed that adult females were there merely to profit capitalist economy by being homemakers. They, of class, wanted to acquire rid of capitalist economy and replacement it with communism ; therefore work forces and adult females would be equal. If packs followed the regulations of communism, there would be more adult females to equal work forces ( if they wanted to be a condemnable, that is ) .

Marianne Weber ( Max Weber 's married woman ) , was a good known women's rightist. She believed that adult females should be treated every bit in all establishments ( largely the establishment of matrimony ) . This could be said for packs every bit good, the establishment of packs should handle adult females every bit.

Symbolic-Interactionists Perspective

Symbolic interactionism is how groups and persons interact with each other. It focuses on the personal individuality of a individual creates when interacting with others persons or groups ( largely affecting group force per unit areas and an person 's actions ) . People create symbolic constructions that make life what it is through interacting. It is defined that the constructions that symbolic interactionism is made of, allows the histrions ( the persons and groups ) to understand and see things in similar ways. Interacting like this is how society is made.

Peoples are born in a society with symbolic constructions, and it is a procedure that we can see really taking topographic point, right before our

really eyes. If a individual is n't interacting with face-to-face interaction, so interactionist ignores anything outside the interaction kingdom.

Symbolic interactionist would explicate that packs are good topics for interacting. They would see packs as a structured community group of persons that interact in all the clip. A good illustration would be when they make their drug trades. In order to finish that undertaking, they must interact in a manner to acquire the most out of their sale. If they want to maintain the client ( or other histrion ) coming back for more concern, so they will interact in a manner that is different from their normal manner.

Herbert Blumer, pupil of George Herbert Mead, was given recognition for the word `` symbolic interactionism '' . Meaning, linguistic communication, and thought were the three nucleus rules that he believed made up symbolic interactionism. Meaning gave life to the manner people interacted with one another. It gave intending to the manner people saw things in life around us. Language is the voice of concluding and understanding another 's reading of symbols. Thought is when a individual 's idea procedure comes to different reading for a similar symbol. If you combine the three nucleus rules, a signifier of communicating is so created.

Herbert Blumer would believe that packs meet the three nucleus rules that are contributed to symbolic interactionism. They use intending every clip they try to happen manner to pass on with other gang members or foreigners. If significance is n't shown, things can and will travel incorrect in certain types of state of affairss. Language is the most of import nucleus rule usage. They use it to

give voice to their readings and relay them to their hearer. Language is used daily by mobster ; they use it the most when giving orders or doing trades. Thought could do major jobs for most gang members. If they get the incorrect reading of something that was meant to be of import, they would be in large problem. For illustration, if a pack foreman told one of his subordinates `` today is payday '' , the subordinate would likely acquire a incorrect reading of what he meant.

The pack foreman could intend that it was payday for him and merely him. The subordinates could hold thought that statement meant that he and the other workers would eventually acquire their payroll check for their difficult work. That 's a good illustration of how the pack foreman and underling arrive to the ideas and linguistic communication. Normally all three nucleus rules are used in every twenty-four hours pass oning in society.

A discrepancy of symbolic interactionism that became popular late is societal contructionism. Social constructionists argue that when people interact, they typically assume things are of course or innately what they seem to be ( 14 ) . Peoples in today 's society expression at packs and presume they are felons who should be locked off. But are n't they people excessively? Some pack members have no other option but to fall in a pack. They are many personal grounds that could be fault to why a individual joins a pack. Social constructionists are good known to analyse these types of jobs and work out them.

I read an article today on Yokel! titled Tonss charged with the largest

Medicare scam of all time. The article talked about Armenian Gangsters and how they, and their associates, used wellness attention clinics to fraud Medicare out of $ 163 million. It is noted that this fraud is thought of as the largest fraud by one endeavor. The Federal Prosecutors charged and arrested some of the 73 people in a couple different provinces that were involved in the cozenage.

This article is proof that packs are still out at that place in field sight. Gang activity has bit by bit increased in the twentieth century. Gangs sell drugs ; purchase drugs, putting to death, etcaˆ¦ It all depends on the state of affairs they are found in.

As I 've stated before, people merely ca n't understand why a individual would desire to fall in a pack and go a condemnable. They are many grounds like poorness, equal force per unit area, ennui, and desperation. I 've explained that people join packs to do money if they are in despairing demand of it. Peer force per unit area is another ground why people join packs. Young kids and teens are normally the 1s that fall under equal force per unit area. They are the most susceptible groups of people that ever want to follow the crowd and tantrum in with the `` ice chest '' childs.

Boredom is another ground. Boredom can take a individual to make about anything in order to remedy said ennui. Last, desperation is connected to poorness. Those who are in poverty find themselves despairing on how they are traveling to acquire money where could they acquire the money.

Regular people who are n't sociological theoretician will

come up with their ain positions of packs, and they are free to talk their sentiments. It does n't count if you are a theoretician or non, packs are seen and analyzed by mundane people.