Crime & Delinquency

http://cad.sagepub.com

The Affluent Suburban Male Delinquent

Jerry J. Tobias
Crime Delinquency 1970; 16; 273
DOI: 10.1177/001112877001600305

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://cad.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/16/3/273

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Crime & Delinquency can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://cad.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://cad.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008

© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
 The Affluent Suburban
Male Delinquent
JERRY J. TOBIAS
Associate Professor of Education, University of Detroit;
Director of Juvenile Services, Bloomfield Township Police Dept., Bloomfield, Mich.;
Member, Mayor’s Commission on Children and Youth, Detroit, Mich.
Lecturer in Sociology, University of Detroit, 1960-64;
Assistant Professor ofSociology, Detroit Institute of Technology, 1964-65
Ph.B., 1954, M.A., 1960, University of Detroit; Ed., 1967, Wayne State University

The enormous rise in suburban delinquency rates since World

War II and the scarcity of related data indicate an urgent need
for sociological studies of this problem. One such study was
conducted in a midwestern suburban community to determine
the predominant types of misconduct in which the affluent sub-
urban delinquent involves himself and the causes of this anti-
social behavior.
The investigators collected data from three groups of subjects,
one of affluent suburban delinquents, one of affluent suburban

non-delinquents, and one of delinquents from the local urban

community. Most of the information was gained from three for-
mal interview questionnaires; official records provided additional
data.
The results indicated that middle- and upper-middle-class sub-
urban delinquents tend to involve themselves in less serious
types of offenses than do their urban counterparts and that fac-
tors contributing to their antisocial behavior include the influ-
ence of friends,
feelings of boredom, and the influence of parents.

INCE WORLD WAR II the rate of de-
S linquency in suburban areas has
increased enormously,i and recent
statistics suggest that the largest in-
crease in the delinquency rate is no
longer in the slum, but in suburban
America.2 This rise in antisocial be-
1S. Kirson Weinberg, Social Problems in
Our Time (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice
Hall, 1960) , p. 121.
2 "The Explosion in Teen-Age Crimes,"
U.S. News & World Report, Oct. 9, 1967, p.
74; J. Robert Moskin, "Suburbs Made to Or-
der for Crime," Look, May 31, 1966, pp. 21-
27.
havior, chiefly manifested in in-
creased suburban property damage,
not only is a cause for concern among
the individual families involved, the
schools, and the police, but also has
led to general public alarm.
It further appears that available
data on suburban delinquency is nei-
ther adequate nor conclusive as to the
nature of the delinquency within
such areas. No subject is more diffi-
cult to analyze or even to investigate
than the extent and nature of antiso-
cial activity by the children of white-

273
Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008
© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
274

collar families, the &dquo;better families,&dquo; likely employed in a profession-

the families that make up 90 per cent
of the population of so many suburbs
and residential developments.3
Thus, the ingredients of a major
social problem are clearly evident4:
1. A noticeable breakdown in
suburban middle- and upper-middle-
class adolescent social behavior exists.
2. The situation involves a consid-
erable number of suburban youth.
to be
or managerial position
al, executive,
in the city. Although living twenty
miles from the central city creates
some inconvenience, apparently it
cannot overshadow such positive ben-
efits as freedom from urban conges-
tion.
Police records indicate that in 1967,
when the study was conducted, there
was a substantial increase in antiso-

3. The condition is of serious con- cial behavior among the juvenile

cern to many segments of the commu- population in the area.
nity.
Since the scarcity of current data Methodology
compounds the seriousness of the situ- goals of this
In order to fulfill the
ation, there is an obvious need for study, two
groups of suburban sub-
research into this suburban social pa- jects, all residents of the community,
thology. A study was therefore under- were selected. One group consisted of
taken attempting to describe (1) the one hundred white male delinquent
specific antisocial behavior patterns juveniles; the other was a comparison
of suburban middle- and upper- group of one hundred white male
middle-class delinquent boys, and (2) non-delinquent juveniles. Both groups
the causal factors associated with this were predominantly Christian; in
antisocial behavior. both the majority were Protestant.

The Research
Although ages range from ten through
Setting sixteen, 80 per cent of the delinquents
The study area, suburban com-
a and 85 per cent of the non-delin-
munity located in the midwestern quents were from fourteen to sixteen
United States, had a population of years old. Table I depicts their com-
slightly more than 35,000 in 1967 and position in greater detail. Each sub-
has its own governmental unit, police ject was from a middle- or upper-mid-
and fire departments, school system, dle class family in terms of parental
churches, and library. The average occupation, income, and residence. In
family consists of a middle- to upper- addition, the records of the local
middle-class husband and wife and urban youth bureau for 1967 were
their two children. They have two utilized in order to contrast the be-
cars and are in the havior of the suburban delinquent
process of purchas-
ing a new, spacious suburban home with that of the urban delinquent.
costing at least $35,000. The head of Three formal interview question-
the family is college-educated and naires provided the most valuable in-
earns well over $10,000 a year. He is formation ; official records were used
3 Harrison
to determine supplemental data.
Salisbury, The Shook-Up Gen-
eration (New York: Harper & Row, 1958),
p. 86. Findings
4 See Robert K. Merton and Robert A.

Nesbet, Contemporary Social Problems (New

1. The specific antisocial behavior
York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961), p. patterns of suburban middle-and up-
11 (a social problem defined). per-middle-class delinquent boys.
Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008
© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
 275

TABLE1
COMPOSITION OF THESUBURBAN SAMPLE

The affluent suburban offenders further categorized in terms of their

are predominantly represented in
Class II types of crime.5 They may be
5 The 1966 Annual Report of the local
urban police department separates juvenile
crimes into the following two-class cate-
gories : Class I—criminal homicide, rape,
robbery, aggravated assaults, burglary (break-
ing and entering), larceny (theft), auto
theft; Class II—other assaults, forgery and
specific type of crime involvement.
counterfeiting, embezzlement and fraud, buy-
ing or receiving or possessing stolen proper-
ty, carrying concealed weapons, sex offenses,
violation of narcotic laws, disorderly con-
duct, drinking, vagrancy, loitering, arson, ma-
licious destruction of property, unlawfully
taking and using a motor vehicle, trespass-
ing, truancy from home, truancy from school,
running away.

Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008

© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
276

For purposes of comparison, the Tables 2 and 3 show that most

urban offenders were also categorized
according to the class and specific
type of offense. In contrast to his
suburban counterpart, the urban de-
linquent is more likely to involve
himself in Class I offenses.
TABLE 2
SPECIFIC OFFENSE INVOLVEMENT OF
AFFLUENT SUBURBAN MALE DELINQUENTS
suburban delinquents involve them-
selves in such offenses as malicious
destruction of property, running away
from home, disorderly conduct, and
larceny, while most urban delin-
quents participate in such offenses as
burglary, breaking and entering, lar-
ceny, and auto theft. These differ-
TABLE 3
SPECIFIC OFFENSE INVOLVEMENT OF
URBAN MALE DELINQUENTS

Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008

© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.

ences become significant when a
more
comparative analysis of the crime
classifications is made between the
two youth groups in Table 4.
Several slang terms describe some
of the most popular types of antiso-
cial behavior among today’s affluent
suburban male delinquents:
Moon ing-exposing one’s bare bottom
through a car window to a passing motor-
ist.
Grasser-a beer party held in
area or grassy field.
Jungle Patching-driving
suburban lawns or golf courses and spin-
ning the tires, thus leaving bare patches
in the grass.
Patching-starting from a traffic light
or other dead stop in a car at a high rate
of speed, thus leaving long black rubber
tire marks on the roadway.
Drag Racing-racing a car down a
roadway from a dead stop or a cruising
speed.
Making a Doughnut-spinning a car in
a complete circle on a gravel or dirt road
so as to make circular marks
roadway.
Garaging-entering a garage to steal
the personal property of another.
Mobile Party-having a party in a
rented &dquo;U-Haul&dquo; truck while cruising
through the suburban community.
Bqmbing or Blasting-placing an M-80
firecracker or some other explosive device
in a mailbox, thus as a rule totally de-
stroying the receptacle.
A COMPARISON OF SUBURBAN AND URBAN OFFENSES
WITH REGARD TO CRIME CLASSIFICATIONS
Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008
© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
277
Partying in an Empty Palace-having a
party in an afiiuent suburban home when
the parents are away.
Keeping a Score-recording the amount
of alcoholic beverages one drinks during
the course of a week in order to see who
can consume the most.
Other terminology often used in-
cludes the following:
Making the Rounds-cruising the local
ctrive-in restaurants in an attempt to pick
an open up a female companion.
Making Out-necking or petting with a
a car across member of the opposite sex.
Beer Muscles-an unusual amount of
bravado or strength brought on by over-
indulgence in beer or alcohol.
In the Wheat-has been drinking.
Suds-beer.
Bombed or Smashed-drunk.
The specific offense pattern of the
affluent suburban delinquent is fur-
ther illustrated by more detailed de-
scriptions of three of the most fre-
quently reported antisocial incidents
on the
(malicious destruction of property,
larceny, and disorderly conduct) :
A. Malicious destruction of
prow
erty.
1. Blowing up or pulling down mail
boxes.
2. Breaking windows.
3. Throwing beer bottles through car
windows.
TABLE 4
278
4.Destroying lawns or golf greens.
5.Dumping pool furniture into pools.
6. Chipping or chiseling pools.
7. Chopping down trees or wrecking
gardens.
8. Egging, painting, or shooting at
houses.
9. Damaging new houses under con-
struction.
10. Breaking fences.
11. Killing pets.
12. Despoking bicycles.
13. Shooting out lights.
14. Painting cars.
15. Twisting off car aerials and shatter-
ing windshields with BB’s and pellets.
16. Painting streets and bridge over-
passes.
17. Painting street and
signs.
18.Cutting garden hoses.
19.Bending flag poles.
20. Destroying children’s outdoor toys-
swings, cars, and teeter-totters.
21. Dumping over garbage cans.
B. Larceny.
I.
Garaging.
2. Taking trees and shrubbery.
3. Stealing street, real estate, speed,
warning, and subdivision signs.
4. Taking bicycles, mini-bikes, gocarts,
motorcycles, and snowmobiles.
5. Stealing outdo3r decorations such as
statues and driveway markers.
6. Stealing lawn mowers and garden
tools.
7. Carrying away microphones and
trays from drive-in restaurants and drive-
in movies.
8. Pilfering outdoor Christmas tree
lights and decorations.
9. Stealing outdoor furniture, pool
hardware, and children’s play sets.
10. Taking sporting equipment such as
bowling balls, golf clubs, and baseball
and football gear.
11. Shoplifting candy, comic books, cig-
arettes, gum, and clothing from local
stores.
Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008
© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.
C. Disorderly conduct.
1. Drinking or possessing alcoholic bev-
erages.
2. Using abusive language in school, at
home, or in a public place.
3. Fighting or roughing it up in the
local drive-in restaurant.
4. Loitering and refusing to order food
in the local restaurant.
5. Crashing a party.
6. Refusing to leave a party upon re-
quest.
7. Refusing to quiet down at local pool
or beach parties.
8. Window peeping.
9. Ringing doorbells and knocking on
windows.
10. Roughing it up in local stores and
subdivision
other public places.
2. The causal factors associated
with the antisocial behavior of the
middle- and upper-middle-class subur-
ban male delinquent.
Thirteen possible causes of misbe-
havior among suburban youth were
explored and investigated. The delin-
quent group responded to the causal
questions by listing what they felt was
responsible for their misbehavior,
while the non-delinquents expressed
what they thought caused young peo-
ple like themselves to participate in
norm-violating behavior.
Both groups agreed on the follow-
ing statements:
(a) Friends influence one’s partici-
pation in delinquent misbehavior.
(b) Having nothing to do and feel-
ing bored and restless are contribu-
ting factors.
(c) Parents influence one’s actions
and may contribute to antisocial be-
havior.
(d) Brothers and sisters are not a
basic cause.
(e) The need for money is not a
contributing factor.
 279

(f) The thirst for material things is class suburban affluent male offender
not a basic cause. is overrepresented in Class II offenses
(g) Unhappiness and a desire to do and appears to be developing a type
something bad does not influence of antisocial involvement that reflects
one’s misbehavior. his affluent style of life.
Disagreement over causal factors 2. Causes of delinquency amongst
occurred in several areas. Non- middle- and upper-middle-class subur-
delinquents suggested that a desire ban male youth, as indicated by this
for attention and showing off, a lack investigation, are (1) friends; (2)
of supervision or care, and movies, boredom, having nothing to do, and
TV, comics, and paperback magazines restlessness; (3) parents; (4) sudden
influence delinquent misbehavior, unexplainable urges; and (5) the
while delinquents did not regard feeling that this is the thing to do-
these as contributing factors. The de- the desire for kicks, excitement, ad-
linquent group felt that their misbe- venture, pleasure, and fun.
havior was caused by sudden unex- The results of this study leave
plainable urges, a feeling that this was many questions unanswered and sug-
&dquo;the thing to do,&dquo; and the desire for gest the importance of additional re-
kicks, excitement, adventure, pleas- search regarding the affluent subur-
ure, and fun. There was uncertainty ban delinquent. There is need to re-
in both groups as to whether parental peat the study in this and other
leniency and lack of discipline are afHuent areas in order to further val-
causal factors. Over half of the non- idate the present findings. Sociologi-
delinquents (56 per cent) felt this to cally and psychologically oriented in-
be a contributing factor, while 57 per vestigations of the affluent suburban
cent of the delinquents said that it delinquent need to be undertaken in
was not. order to clarify his background and
consequently to better understand
Summary such an offender and his subculture.
The general purpose of the study It would also be of value to compare
was to investigate and describe the the affluent delinquent’s value struc-
affluent suburban male delinquent. ture to that of the urban offender, to
More specifically, it attempted (1) to determine the effects of this value
describe the behavior patterns of the structure on his behavior, and, fur-
suburban middle- and upper-middle- thermore, to explore parental and
class male delinquent, and (2) to community values and their effect on
indicate the causal factors associated delinquent behavior. Needless to say,
with this behavior. much research still remains to be
In this regard, the findings indicate done on the affluent suburban delin-
significant conclusions: quent in order to cope with an in-
1. The middle- and upper-middle- creasingly threatening social problem.

Downloaded from http://cad.sagepub.com by Francisco Bernabeu on May 26, 2008

© 1970 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or unauthorized distribution.