Lombroso and Biological Positivism

In the 19th Century, Italian prison psychiatrist Cesare Lombroso drew on the ideas of Charles Darwin and suggested that criminals were atavistic: essentially ‘evolutionary throwbacks’.

He suggested that their brains were mal-developed or not fully developed. In his review of prisoners, he found that they shared a number of common physical attributes, such as sloping foreheads and receding chins. In so doing,

Lombroso suggested that involvement in crime was a product of biology and biological characteristics: criminals were born that way. Lombroso’s theory is essentially a theory of biological positivism

Biological explanations of crime assume that some people are ‘born criminals’, who are physiologically distinct from non-criminals. The most famous proponent of this approach is Cesare Lombroso.

Lombroso’s work has long since fallen out of favour. However, biological theories have continued to develop. Rather than measuring physical features of the body,
contemporary approaches focus on:

Biochemical conditions (e.g. linked to
poor diet or hormone imbalance)
Neurophysiological conditions (e.g.
learning disabilities caused by brain
damage) Genetic inheritance and/or abnormality
Intelligence

These attempts, to locate the causes of crime within the individual, suggest that there are identifiable differences between offenders and non-offenders. In other words, the criminal is ‘other’: in some way different or abnormal to everyone else

Feminist Perspectives/Gender
Feminist perspectives share a concern with gender inequality, pointing to the
fact that crime is disproportionately committed by men. Feminist criminologists
such as Elizabeth Stanko (1985) have paid particular attention to male
violence against women, explaining its occurrence by reference to wider
structures of oppression – as well as gendered norms regarding ‘appropriate’
masculine and feminine behaviour.
One concept used by feminist perspectives to explain the maleness of crime is
hegemonic masculinity: the set of ideas, values, representations and practices
associated with ‘being male’ which is commonly accepted as the dominant
position in gender relations in a society at a particular historical moment
(Jefferson, 2006, Sage Dictionary of Criminology). In contemporary Western
society, the dominant or hegemonic masculinity is expressed through paid
employment (perhaps being the ‘bread winner’ in the household); being
heterosexual; and subordinating women. Criminologist James W.
Messerschmidt (1993) argues that for some men, in certain groups, men do
masculinity (that is, express their masculinity) through the engagement and
commission of crime.

Social Control Theory
Strictly speaking control theory does not address the causes of crime, but
rather focuses on why people obey the law. In other words, it explains
conformity rather than deviance.
It is primarily associated with the work of Travis Hirschi (1969), an America
social scientist who proposed that people general conform to social norms due
to strong social bonds. Conversely, they engage in delinquent acts when these
bonds are broken or weak. The key components of social bonds are:
 Attachment: How strong or weak is an individual’s relationship with
others? Do these others expect certain kinds of behaviour (such as
obeying the law) from this individual? The stronger the attachment and
the stronger the expectations, the more likely it is that the individual will
conform.
 Commitment: The more an individual commits his/herself to a particular
lifestyle (for example, being married, being a parent, having a job), the
more he/she has to lose if he/she becomes involved in crime (and so
deviate from the lifestyle).
 Involvement: This component comes down to time – the more time the
individual spends engaging in law abiding behaviour, the less time
he/she has to engage in law breaking behaviour.
 Belief: this relates to upbringing. If an individual has been brought up to
be law abiding, they are less likely to become involved in crime.