Aggressive incidents inside a Montreal barroom involving patrons, barmaids and bouncers: A micro level examination of routine activity theory

Abstract

Objectives: This article further examines the phenomenon of aggression inside barrooms by relying on the "bouncer-ethnographer" methodology. The objective is to investigate variations in aggression through time and space according to the role and routine of the target in a Montreal barroom. Thus, it provides an examination of routine activity theory at the micro level: the barroom.Methods: For a period of 258 nights of observation in a Canadian barroom, bouncers completed reports on each intervention and provided specific information regarding what happened, when and where within the venue. In addition, the bouncer-ethnographer compiled field observations and interviews with bar personnel in order to identify aggression hotspots and "rush hours" for three types of actors within barrooms: (a) bouncers, (b) barmaids and (c) patrons.Findings: Three different patterns emerged for shifting hotspots of aggression depending on the target. As the night progresses, aggressive incidents between patrons, towards barmaids and towards bouncers have specific hotspots and rush hours influenced by the specific routine of the target inside the barroom. Implications:The current findings enrich those of previous work by pointing to the relevance of not only examining the environmental characteristics of the barroom, but also the role of the target of aggression. Crime opportunities follow routine activities, even within a specific location on a micro level. Routine activity theory is thus relevant in this context, because as actors in differing roles follow differing routines, as do their patterns of victimization.

On the Actual Risk of Bystander Intervention: A Statistical Study Based on Naturally Occurring Violent Emergencies

“…Among police officers, van Reemst, Fischer and Zwirs (2015) show that aggressive types of involvement enhance the victimization risk, and studies on bouncers suggest that ruleenforcing behavior, where the bouncer enters into a direct conflict with an unruly bar patron, is riskier than situations where the bouncer intervenes in order to stop a conflict between bar patrons (Graham and Homel 2012;Geoffrion et al 2015).…”

“Being on both sides: covert ethnography and partisanship with bouncers in the night‐time economy”

“…Rigakos (2008), in his study of Canadian bouncers, links their occupational rise to the 'spectacle of consumption'. Some cross-cultural comparative studies of bouncers have been conducted in Australia (Tomsen, 2005), Canada (Geoffrion et al, 2015), Denmark (Sogaard and Krause-Jensen, 2020;Tutenges et al, 2015), South Africa (Mbhele and Singh, 2019), the Czech Republic (Kupka et al, 2018) and the United States (Roberts, 2007).…”

Bartenders and Customers’ Interactions. Influence on Sexual Assaults in Nightlife

“…In their research, Buddie and Parks [25] note the lack of supervision or behavioral standards, as well as the existence of a pool table, while other research [22] highlights the presence of reserved areas for sex as an element that increases the chance of reporting sexual aggression. Additionally, the kind of customer who frequents a particular bar is a factor to consider since episodes of violence usually occur in bars with greater concentrations of large, homogeneous groups of young men [26] outnumbering women on the dance floor [27]. Other studies have identified "hotspots" for aggression, whether sexual or otherwise, and stress the high rate of sexual assaults associated with dancing [28].…”

“…The role of bar and nightclub staff in the occurrence and prevention of violence and, more specifically, in events that involve groups of men engaging in fights has been widely analyzed. There is a body of literature reporting on the excessive use of violence by bouncers and other security staff in nightclubs [49] and also research [27] analyzing aggression between patrons and towards bouncers and barmaids. Additionally, research from Graham and colleagues [50] shows the very passive nature of security staff in relation to eventual acts of aggression towards women and sexual assault, in which they rarely intervene, especially when violence takes the form of harassment that is not strictly physical [50,51].…”