In Defense of Violentization: Rebutting My Critics

• In Event: Explaining Violence: Theory, Gender, Ethnicity, and Gangs

Abstract

In Defense of Violentization: Rebutting My Critics

Since I introduced the term “violentization” to designate my explanation of violent socialization process in 1989, the theory has been greatly expanded, so that it now also explains the formation of attempted and completed violent criminal acts and the nature of the communities in which they take place. Over the last quarter of a century, criminologists have identified several alleged shortcomings in the theory, including that it cannot account for :(1) why females much less often than males become violent criminals, (2) why blacks much more often than whites become them, and (3) why violent crime rates dramatically fluctuate in the same community. In addition, criminologists have also claimed that the theory suffers from (4) operating on a simple processual model of causation, (5) lack of attentiveness to the foreground experiences undergone by violent criminals when they commit violent crimes, (6) lack of sufficient novelty, and (7)presenting formidable difficulties as far as making it operational, and thereby, testable is concerned. Each one of these criticism, none of which I have previously addressed, except the first one, is examined.

Author

• Lonnie Athens, Seton Hall University