Are Violent Crimes Enjoyable to Commit - Essay Example

? Seductions of violence: Why might violent crime be 'enjoyable' to commit or vicariously witness? BY YOU YOUR SCHOOL INFO HERE HERE “My hate isgeneral, I detest all men; Some because they are wicked and do evil, Others because they tolerate the wicked, Refusing them the active vigorous scorn Which vice should stimulate in virtuous minds” (Moliere 2000, p.1). Introduction The psychological or sociological constructs inherent in perpetrators of, or witnesses to, violent crime are unique and diverse. There are significant gaps in science-supported research knowledge in criminology that paints a distinct portrait of what drives all violent criminal behaviour, thus leaving us with only subjective determinations about what might produce a desire to commit violent crimes. There are multitudes of theories describing how violent crime can produce powerful emotional responses, with each explanatory piece of research utilising constructs in sociology and psychology to provide a foundation of knowledge in criminological profiling. Ranging from social learning theory to the maladapted attachment relationships with the female parent during childhood, legitimate case studies and qualitative research on the subject have yet to concretely classify what drives individuals to take personal pleasure from the act of violence or through vicarious witnessing of violent behaviours. However, these understandings supported by genuine research endeavours do give unique insight into understanding the fundamentals of human behaviour as it is correlated with violence responses. Research has identified that those who find personal pleasure from observing or carrying out violent crimes maintain antisocial behaviours, have a powerful connection with peer reference groups, maintain a genuine and inescapable dislike for compliance with social norms, or develop maladjusted moral and ethical values and principles that lead to egocentrism. This paper describes the many different, probable constructs of human behaviour and development that lead to finding personal satisfaction when conducting violent crimes or observing others performing violent acts. Social learning theory Social learning theory is an accepted model in psychology for understanding why individuals turn toward reference groups in order to measure the appropriateness of their own behaviours. This theory asserts that when members of a social reference group maintain characteristics that are considered desirable, credible and relevant to one’s own values and principles, they are likely to mould these same behaviours (Weiten and Lloyd 2005). Albert Bandura, a respected psychologist, links social learning theory with the concept of operant conditioning, in which behaviour is reinforced based on the degree to which the social environment rewards or punishes one’s behaviour (Bandura 1977). Operant theory also highlights the concept of vicarious reinforcement in which individuals observe other people’s behaviour being reinforced or chastised and then developing a framework for moral and ethical acceptability based on what has been observed (Bandura 1977). Individuals in society that perform violent acts often socialise with peer reference groups that maintain similar values and principles in an effort to find social identity and justify one’s position in group membership. “Crime is learned through association” (Cullen and Agnew 2002, p.31). Psychologists and sociologists recognise that in certain social circles, there can be found criminal subcultures consisting of a variety of antisocial peers. In this type of social environment, chronic criminal behaviours are reinforced and repeated by credible and desirable peer networks (Cullen and Agnew 2002). However, what exactly is antisocial behaviour? It is a series of behaviours and attitudes that ultimately cause damage in broader society and when these behaviours defy prevailing social norms in a culture or society. Individuals maintaining antisocial behaviours often engage in excessive drinking in public places, engage in hate crimes, or carry firearms for the pursuit of intimidation. People maintaining antisocial behaviours and attitudes maintain a general dislike for the social norms established in society and rebel against this established order in order to illustrate their independence or to feed their own misguided conceptions of narcissism (Weiten and Lloyd 2005). When this type of behaviour occurs in a social group with established and trusted peers, it is likely the individual will adopt these same behaviours since they are reinforced and approved by individuals maintaining similar antisocial characteristics. Under social learning theory, when peer reference groups find humour and amusement at the expense of another when committing violent acts, an individual that looks toward this group for identity formation will comply with reference group attitudes. To defy these values would create division in the social order within this peer network, leading to out-group status for those who do not comply with group values and principles. It would be highly subjective to say, concretely, that legitimised enjoyment during the process of committing violent acts is experienced by an individual with strong emotional connections to peer reference groups. Rather, enjoyment is a programmed, psychological response in order to save face within the in-group where complying with mockery or teasing of the victim ensures longevity among important acquaintances. In any event, the desire to gain approval and praise by critical reference associates serves as the foundation for finding personal joy and satisfaction in the process of committing violent crimes against others in society. Attachments with parents in youth It is during the formative years in childhood and adolescence where youths build powerful emotional attachments with the female parent. In households where such attachments are disrupted, it can create permanent psychological harm and deconstruct whatever model of empathy that once was pre-existing in the youth (Fagan 1995). Whether the mother is emotionally unattached or whether the structural dynamics of the family demand that the mother be absent during formative years, deprivation of powerful emotional attachments lead to long-term mistrust for others after reaching adulthood and also can serve to lay the foundation of antisocial behaviours (Fagan 1995). Individuals who find joy and satisfaction either in committing violent acts or through vicarious observation of these acts may have had stunted emotional growth stemming from an emotionally unattached or unavailable female caretaker. It is during these years of human development where empathy is passed on from a typically-emotionally-balanced mother figure, providing life-long lessons on concepts of compassion and understanding for others in society (Morris and Maisto 2005). Empathy is defined as “the capacity to perceive and to experience the state of another” (Krevans and Gibbs 1996, p.3265). Empathy is often considered to be akin to emotional intelligence, a theory in psychology in which an individual is not only in touch with their own emotional capacity but is able to successfully translate this into sympathetic attitudes toward others to establish more pro-social behaviours. Why is the development of empathy, founded in early childhood, so critical to determining whether an individual finds enjoyment through violence? When an individual has experienced disruptive attachments to the female caretaker, they begin to develop less trust for others in society (Fagan 1995). Not having a foundation of moral and ethical behaviours that are deemed appropriate for development of pro-social values and principles, when coupled with misguided mistrust for others, leads to growing resentment against society. Thus, an individual that did not experience positive emotional attachments with the mother will seek out opportunities to harm others. This is strongly justified through analyses of multitudes of case studies involving serial killers who maintained very unnatural relationships with their mothers. Charles Manson and Henry Lee Lucas were paraded about by their mothers sporting women’s clothing (LaBrode 2007). Bobby Joe Long and Charles Manson were also inappropriately exposed to their mother’s wild sexual behaviours during childhood which often included elements of sadism (LaBrode 2007). Disruptive or negative attachments with the female caretaker creates distorted, life-long suspicion against others and uncertainty about their own, acceptable place in society. These warped conceptions of the social order creates the motivation to harm others, perhaps even with a methodology that violent acts against others serves a form of twisted revenge for the wrongs experienced during development years. Rather than feeling empathy for the innocent who are accosted by violent behaviours, the maladjusted individual detached from the mother during childhood experiences delight or sadistic amusement at the expense of others. Sadism and the unconscious mind A recent study using a sample of 94 random men with no histories of sexual offenses uncovered startling revelations about the mindset of people in today’s society. The study reported that 33 percent of respondents regularly fantasized about raping others whilst an additional 14.9 percent of respondents maintained recurrent sexual humiliation fantasies (Federoff 2008). These rather astounding figures would tend to illustrate that approximately 50 percent of the population, people deemed to be characteristically normal, maintained personality and values constructs that could eventually lead to sexual sadism against others. Sexual sadists, as an appropriate example of a relevant violent crime, find personal satisfaction from exploiting and harming others using sexual means. This includes raping partners, imposing domination and control against others, and degrading victims through the provision of pain using devices or implements to sexually assault victims (Warren and Hazelwood 2002). Though not everyone in society is a practicing sexual sadist, the research study utilising 94 random men with no history of sexual offenses did illustrate that there are predictable personality characteristics in general society that could find personal satisfaction through inflicting harm against others sexually or humiliating others using sexual means and practices. In society, lifestyle and the appropriateness of established social norms are continuously judged by other members of society. How a person complies with these demands or rejects them will determine the level of reward or chastisement received from various social or authoritative networks. The establishment of legislation to prevent behaviour from occurring that goes against majority opinion acts as a control instrument by which violent behaviours are oppressed using fear of imprisonment (Henslin 2005). Individuals in society that feel wrongly controlled by established legal systems utilising guidelines for acceptable behaviours, especially when the individual does not share these normative constructs, can grow increasingly frustrated with authority systems. In order to enact a form of quiet riot against these systems, sexual sadism fulfils an inherent desire to rebel and gain some form of conscious mastery over the self. The imposition of social systems and legislation would seem to be predictors of the type of personality that would find enjoyment, even if only short-term, by watching another be humiliated or harmed sexually. Sigmund Freud was a pioneer in the domain of psychology that is today referred to as psychoanalysis, a psychological template believing that adults are impacted by events occurring in childhood and where it is common practice to mask genuine values and beliefs with a variety of defence mechanisms to protect the self from emotional harm (Weiten and Lloyd 2005). Defence mechanisms are utilised by a maladjusted individual with poor coping skills to deny or manipulate the truth whilst attempting to use these defence mechanisms to maintain a positive, outward social self-image. It is not the conception of defence mechanisms that matters, rather it is the type of personality that utilises these unconstructive and harmful psychological tools to remove oneself from accepting reality that is important to understanding how an individual in society finds satisfaction through violence. There are some individuals that utilise humour as a defence mechanism, telling jokes or amusing anecdotes in order to mask their legitimate emotional states (Martin et al. 2003). This is referred to as affiliative humour, a style of defence mechanism where humorous comments are made in any number of negative situations in order to gain positive approval from important reference group members. After having been witness to a violent act, the individual may attempt to utilise humour in order to mask the complexities genuinely occurring in the individuals’ mindset about what they have just observed. In an effort to simply sweep away the emotional difficulties of violent behaviour, this type of individual expresses outward joy rather than having to deal with the difficult convolution of horror or empathy of the violent act they have just witnessed. In this type of scenario where defence mechanisms are common delusions used to protect the self, the individual may not have legitimately enjoyed the violent act observed, but express to others in their social network that it was entertaining or comical. People who use humour as a defence mechanism will often tease, demean or ridicule others as a means of satisfying their own egotism or saving proverbial face in the social environment (Martin et al. 2003). Whereas in reality they are not actually enjoying the violence, instead they are unable to effectively cope with the shock or fear in appropriate ways and instead select opportunities to parody the event. Though this is also subjective analyses of defence mechanisms and their role in understanding why violence can be enjoyable to some in society, it does tend to explain why others believe there is legitimate pleasure and delight stemming from some when in actuality gratified responses are simply maladjusted denial strategies. A discussion of findings As identified previously, there are significant gaps in research knowledge literature regarding concrete understandings of why individuals in society find enjoyment when committing or observing violent acts. The fundamentals of inherent personality characteristics, the foundation of empathic learning during development years in childhood and adolescence, or the level of importance of relevant peer reference groups would seem to be predictors of why individuals find humour when performing or observing violent crimes. The complexities of emotional programming and psychological adjustment in society are too broad and diverse to identify a definite model to help society understand how one can find personal joy and satisfaction at the expense of another. Whether the individual feels out of control as it pertains to the establishment of majority-generated legislative controls or whether disturbed and otherwise neurotic attitudes and perceptions play a role in joy as an outcome of violence, there are multiple dimensions of psycho-social attributes that will determine the extent to which a person feels empathy for the victim or seeks opportunities to ridicule and taunt victims. Conclusion It would seem that constructs associated with social learning theory, the utilisation of defence mechanisms, and the quality of parental attachments will serve as the largest predictors of what drives an individual to find personal gratification when committing or observing violent crimes. Much of this phenomenon is related to finding personal control either in the social environment or seeking mastery over the self and distorted moral and value systems that will determine the degree to which enjoyment is experienced as an outcome of violent acts. An individual who finds significant satisfaction at the expense of another victimised by violent behaviours is disturbed and unstable, however it would appear that to chastise the individual for this estranged set of values and principles would only lead to more defence mechanisms being constructed as the individual attempts to salvage their all-important social identity among peers. Further scientific research to support what actually creates personal enjoyment in violent behaviours and witnessing of violent acts is clearly required to close the knowledge gaps in this subject. However, this paper provided a foundation for clarifying pre-existing misunderstandings regarding what drives one individual to find shock and confusion over violence whilst another finds joy in harming others in society. Whether sadist-based or the product of poor social development, enjoyment as a product of violence represents a disturbed psycho-social profile. References Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. London: Prentice Hall. Cullen, F.T. and Agnew, R. (2002). Criminological Theory: Past to Present (Essential Readings). Los Angeles: Roxbury. Fagan, P.F. (1995). The real root causes of violent crime – The breakdown of marriage, family and community. [online] Available at: http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/1995/03/bg1026nbsp-the-real-root-causes-of-violent-crime (accessed 7 December 2012). Federoff, J.P. (2008). Sadism, Sadomasochism, Sex and Violence, Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 53(1), pp.637-646. [online] Available at: http://www.theroyal.ca/fedoroff/files/2011/07/2008_Fedoroff_Sadism-Sadomasochism-Sex-and-Violence.pdf (accessed 6 December 2012). Henslin, James M. (2005). Sociology: A Down to Earth Approach. 7th ed. A & B Publishing. Krevans, J. and Gibbs, J.C. (1996). Parents’ use of inductive discipline: Relations to children’s empathy and prosocial behaviour, Child Development, 67(1), pp.3263-3277. LaBrode, R.T. (2007). Etiology of the psychopathic serial killer: An analysis of antisocial personality disorder, psychopathy, and serial killer personality and crime scene characteristics, Brief Treatment and Crisis Intervention, 7(2), pp.151-160. Martin, R.A., Puhlik-Doris, P., Larsen, G., Gray, J. and Weir, K. (2003). Individual differences in uses of humour and their relation to psychological well-being: Development of the humour styles questionnaire, Journal of Research in Personality, 37(2), pp.48-75. Moliere, A. (2000). Le Misanthrope Act 1 Scene 1. [online] Available at: http://www.bibliomania.com/0/6/4/1967/26178/1/frameset.html (accessed 6 December 2012). Morris, C. and Maisto, A. (2005). Psychology: An Introduction. 11th ed. Pearson Prentice Hall. Warren, J.I. and Hazelwood, R.R. (2002). Relational patterns associated with sexual sadism: A study of 20 wives and girlfriends, Journal of Family Violence, 17(1). Weiten, W. and Lloyd, M. (2005). Psychology Applied to Modern Life: Adjustment in the 21st Century, 7th ed. Thompson Wadsworth. Read More