The Somalian community is similar to an extent in that they are unable to “fit in” with the mainstream values and therefore establish their own subculture, to which, can be portrayed negatively by the media as the area of St.Pauls is renowned for crime. Therefore the sub-culturalists theory can be useful in understanding crime and deviance in a society where citizens don’t “fit in” with the mainstream values. By creating their own subculture their values are likely to differ from the mainstream and therefore some crimes deemed as an offence in a mainstream society is likely to differ from that of a subculture group.
For example the use of Cannabis by Rastafarians is deemed appropriate and the “norm” in their subculture, yet as part of a bigger mainstream society it is deemed illegal. Therefore subcultures can be created by cultural differences and are always likely to exist if mainstream values don’t alter. For instance if there was an influx of a particular religious group then its likely their attitudes, beliefs and values are different from the mainstream attitudes, values and beliefs that are already in existence. Although it can be argued that residents in the well-established Clifton area are part of a subculture from mainstream society to those who live in middle class regions for instance; because of their wealth and status the wealthier
In order to support this theory, Cohen concocted research in 1955 on lower working class boys to which, he discovered that they suffer from “cultural deprivation” which then causes them to feel “status frustration”. From this they replace society’s goals for them with their own values and create a subculture. Cohen discovered that deviancy and crime is a reaction to denied opportunity and it helps solve their frustration. The subculture formed here has a great deal in common with the Marxist approach to crime and deviancy.
This is true to some extent as the media has often “identified” working class subcultures and portrayed them in a negative light. This interlinks with the Marxist view on mass media and crime, that often only the powerful people like Rupert Murdoch in the mass media are allowed to express their views on current issues and can often indoctrinate views. The same can be said about crime as the majority of crime reported on involves “blue collar workers” and that of the working class. Therefore media tycoons such as Murdoch have established subculture groups such as the “hoodies” and potentially chavs [working class chavs] and report on their actions in the media. In particular, young working class youths have been acknowledged in the media and are now viewed as “unpredictable” and “dangerous”.
This view is now mirrored in society where most people feel uneasy when approached by a group of youths. The new phase known as “happy slapping” has been highlighted in the media and interlinked with the “working class”. Happy slapping to a mainstream society may seem inappropriate and a form of GBH, whereas to a small subculture such as “hoodies” it may seem like “a bit of fun”. Cohen would deem this as the working class boys/adults reacting to a denied opportunity from society [perhaps they were unable to achieve society’s goals such as achieving through a meritocratic system]; consequently via happy slapping they feel like they are in control and have power. This is where the subculture theory again is related to Marxism, subcultures are created when people feel “rejected” or ignored from the mainstream society and therefore create a subculture. With this in mind the mainstream society could be examined as a bourgeoisie system where only a minority actually feel in place and therefore obey the rules [could be argued as the upper class]. Alternatively the proletariats [subcultures] are the majority at the bottom and society is in fact made up of small subcultures. Therefore if this is the case, crime will be perceived differently via each subculture. This is true of football hooliganism at it is viewed as anti-social behaviour and brawling in the streets is not acceptable. Yet to the football hooliganisms this may be seen as “the norm” because they see this as part of their everyday life because of the norms and values they adopted through the creation of a subculture they fit into.
