The document discusses Jock Young's concept of a "bulimic society," where the most excluded and marginalized groups have a strong desire for consumer goods and cultural inclusion, which may lead them to crime. Young argues that those lower in socioeconomic status paradoxically consume more mass media and cultural images than higher classes, so cultural inclusion is the inverse of structural exclusion. The document presents Young's view that modern society is "bulimic," with both inclusion and exclusion occurring simultaneously.

1. I have a friend who is a
probation officer. She says that
the first thing young people
want when they come out of a
prison, or young persons
offenders institution is not a
meal, not somewhere to live
but a new pair of trainers or a
new mobile phone.
This illustrates Jock Young’s
notion of BULIMIC SOCIETY.
A BULIMIC SOCIETY is a society in which the poorest most
deprived people are more desperate for the trappings of
consumer society than other groups in society. Therefore the
most excluded and marginalised group crave cultural inclusion
– a craving which will surely lead them into crime. 1

2. Bulimic Society (Bulimia = abnormally voracious
appetite or unnaturally constant hunger)
Whereas subcultural interpretations of the ‘anti-social yob’ might
assume that such people fall outside mainstream culture, there is
evidence to suggest otherwise. Jock Young (2003) identifies that
those individuals most likely to be perceived as being anti-social or
otherwise criminal (i.e. those lower down the class structure) actually
consume greater quantities of these cultural images through the
mass media, not smaller quantities. He therefore claims that
“paradoxically, cultural inclusion is the inverse of structural inclusion”
(Young, 2003:398) He therefore describes contemporary society as
“bulimic” where both inclusion and exclusion occur concurrently:
“…a bulimic society where massive cultural inclusion is accompanied
by systematic structural exclusion. It is a society that has both strong
centrifugal and centripetal currents: it absorbs and it rejects.”
(Young, 2003)
2

3. Left Realists advocate a two-pronged
strategy to deal with crime
1 POLICING AND CONTROL
A return to community policing as opposed to
military style policing so that people see the
police as trusted friends not enemies on their
doorstep. This will facilitate more crime
reportage so that something gets done about
crime. There is an urgent need to break the
circle of no-go areas, no ‘grassing’, getting
away with crime, and thus nothing changes
3

4. 2 ADDRESS DEEPER STRUCTURAL
CAUSES
• Long-term political and social changes needed
to incorporate marginalised groups, reduce
inequalities and to eradicate ghettos
4

5. Criticisms of Left Realism
• By focusing on working class crime they ignore
the crimes of the powerful which pose a much
greater threat to the working class
• Relative Deprivation – why don’t all those who
feel this commit crime?
5

6. Strengths of Left Realism
• Highlights the reality of crime in terms of its
effects on the victims, especially the poor and
vulnerable
• Recommends practical measures at street
level to improve people’s lives and indeed has
had some influence on New Labour policies on
crime
6

7. Strengths of Left Realism
• Highlights the reality of crime in terms of its
effects on the victims, especially the poor and
vulnerable
• Recommends practical measures at street
level to improve people’s lives and indeed has
had some influence on New Labour policies on
crime
6