Criminological Self Analysis Of Neutralization Theory

Criminological Self Analysis To understand the factors that have helped shape the individual I am today and the life I am currently living, I must look into my background. One’s history can provide a roadmap of the progression of their life, marking each variable that has changed that individual. I begin my history in the small, poor, rural town of Ontario, Oregon. I was born into a medium sized family, with two older brother-- Jake, six years older than me, and Alex, a year older than Jake. Only a two years after I was born, our number of children doubled with the addition of three identical triplet girls-- Abby, Erin, and Carly. Almost all of us lived a quiet, happy life. Everyone happy except Alex. Alex was diagnosed with bipolar disorder-- …show more content…
I found myself beginning to reasoned with myself that it was necessary to deviate from my previous withholding of weekend partying. I began to use a method of neutralization to justify the reasons in relaxing with a couple drinks on the weekend. In reflection, this behavior best resembles the neutralization theory. Criminologists, Gresham Sykes and David Matza, developed the neutralization theory, especially in relation to the techniques of neutralization. This theory explains the ways deviants justify their own deviance, whether is be by; denying responsibility of their actions, denying anyone was actually injured by their actions, denying the existence of a legitimate victim, condemning those who are placing blame on them, and also to appeal to a higher loyalty (UMD, n.d.). The one technique I found applied to my justification to engaging in these deviant acts was the denial of injury. I thought that in the act of drinking, no one is at risk, therefore, no one could be injured--except myself and my future. Since I viewed any damage to myself as solely self inflicted, I did not see myself as causing injury. In correlation with one of the criticisms of the neutralization theory, I battled with the justification prior to ever engaging in any act of deviance. As a result, I talked myself out of joining my peers at the weekly house parties. This criticism exploits the vagueness of the theory in the sense that it can either justifying the deviance after the act or deterring the individual prior to committing the act of deviance. Despite the criticism, with the inability to find a justifiable means for internally neutralizing the thought of deviance-- I remained on the straight and narrow, once again committed to my