SOC212: Chapter 27 - The Devil Made me do it: Use of Neutralizations by Shoplifters

Ross Au

Reactions:

1) I felt that this chapter was one of the more intriguing ones I have read in this course. This is because
it is the first one that I have read that goes into detail about the mental processes that a deviant may
experience when committing a crime (in this case study, shoplifting). I, also found it interesting
because the techniques that were identified intersect between the individual, psychological aspect of
criminal behavior (such as denial of responsibility, or postponement), while also applying sociological
elements (such as the claim that everyone else is doing it).

2) Reading this chapter reminded me of a few times when I was working in retail, and a customer was
caught shoplifting by the loss prevention team and taken to the back of the store for further police
intervention. I find that in this particular situation, the neutralization technique of “denial of the
victim” is very relatable, because even for myself, as an employee of a large retail chain, I still feel that
the amount of profit lost from a theft scenario in a large corporation is basically statistically
insignificant, though I don't condone theft.

Keepers:

1) A key point I took from this reading was the actual definition of neutralization theory, which is
essentially defined as a process in which deviants undergo in their minds that create justifications or
rationalizations in order to protect the individual from the negative labeling processes and a deviant
identity. This in turn allows for the offender to continue their commitment to the values of mainstream
culture while still being able to commit a criminal act.

2) The list of neutralization techniques that the author provided was another key point to this reading:
denial of responsibility, denial of injury, denial of the victim, condemning the condemners, appeal to
higher loyalties, defense of necessity, metaphor of the ledger, denial of the necessity of law, claim of
entitlement, the claim that everyone else is doing it, justification by comparison, and postponement.

Questions:

1) Though I thought that the explanations and examples that the authors wrote were very simple and
concise, I noticed that they missed one point. In the beginning of the chapter, in the paragraph labeled
“Techniques of Neutralization”, the author identifies a neutralization technique known as the
“metaphor of the ledger”, which is a concept that isn't discussed anywhere further in this chapter. So
my question to the author is simple, what is this metaphor of the ledger?

2) Another question I had for the authors of this chapter is with regards to the neutralization technique
of “defense of necessity”. There is a quote within the paragraph that discusses this technique that an
offender said about how he does not believe in welfare. I would like to know whether or not the
authors think that current welfare support is enough. Is there a way that the state can make welfare
more appealing to those who need it? If so, then is the lack of support in our current social welfare
program a classical case of “the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer”?
Why does the topic matter?

I believe that this topic matters because in my opinion, the use of neutralization techniques to justify
immoral actions applies in many more situations than just shoplifting. The most obvious example I can
think of are the Nazi concentration camps in the second world war. In this scenario, the people who
executed the Jews/Gypsies/crippled etc. have applied techniques to justify their actions such as
dehumanizing those who they were going to kill (calling victims by a number rather than a name, or in
the case of the gas chambers, by not seeing the actual victims, they have applied to some degree, the
technique of “denial of the victim”). Also, I believe that they also used the technique of appealing to
higher loyalties, to justify their killings as a service to the fatherland. So clearly, the study of
neutralization theory is important because as seen in the above example, its application has the
potential for mass destruction.