SUMMARY OF DEVIANCE
In the eighth chapter of “Sociology”, I. Robertson explains that there are many definitions about deviance but not enough, so he tries to find closer one and clarify the deviance. He starts with a question which is “who is deviant?” and lists of its answers.In the list of its answers, Robertson benefits from Simons` study and he says that; “the words refer to people and acts that other people strongly disapprove of ”(23).On the other hand, Robertson then counters it with conflicting topic of sociological literature.He claims that the concept of this definition is found slippery one by sociologists.After this idea,Robertson questions second definition which is “dviance is any behavior that doesn`t conform to social norms”(24).However, Robertson judges this definiton as not helpful.He exemplifies that eating three meals in a day can be deviant behavior for some unimportant social norms.Therefore, Robertson argues that minor deviations aren`t included in the particular sociological interest.He claims that the main idea of sociological interest is about violations which are regarded as offensive by majority of people. And he says that one word is stigma – a bad reputation or disapproving by a lot of people. After this analysis, he benefits from second definition and improves it, so he finally declares a definition, which is “deviance refers to behavior or characteristics that violate significant social norms and expectations and are negatively valued by large numbers of people as a result”(24). He emphasizes that this definition clarifies deviance more than others.
He continues with clarification of deviance by helping of main three points. Firstly, he claims that there is no close relationship between deviance and statistical rarity. He exemplifies that jogging before the breakfast can be unusual statistically but not a reason for deviance. However, Robertson then states that some norms can be modified or abandoned time to time. He makes clear it with an example that premarital sex was prohibited in American society several years ago. However, nowadays the majority of American society admits this event normally. As a result, Robertson declares firmly that norms can lose their force or influence as time passes. Secondly, Robertson argues about division of “normals” and “deviants”. He explains briefly that there is no class between normals and deviants. He illustrates that if we divide people as thieves, patients (mental disordered) or drug users, we will have a few “normal” people. In addition to them, Robertson says, “deviance is relative”(25).
...ightened by Erikson’s arguments. It is not often that I hear a sociological theory and think “AH HA! I get it.” But in this case I felt as though I could have a very clear understanding of what he was trying to say. However, although the evidence of deviance through our history as humans really does go to show that deviancy brings us together in a joint force for what we believe to be the common good and morality. Erikson’s evidence of mainly court records is not an adequate basis on determining a theory to explain the nature of society and its relationship with deviancy. I think if he had a true record of how the communities he studies reacted to deviance on every level. So far his study is without official statistics. It is my belief however this study could be more accurate if there were to be data collected on processes were enables to provide alternative data.
The theoretical study of societal reaction to deviance has been carried out under different names, such as, labelling theory, interactionist perspective, and the social constructionist perspective. In the sociology of deviance, the labelling theory of deviant behaviour is often used interchangeably with the societal reaction theory of deviancy. As a matter of fact, both phrases point equally to the fact that sociological explanations of deviance function as a product of social control rather than a product of psychology or genetic inheritance. Some sociologists would explain deviance by accepting without question definitions of deviance and concerning themselves with primary aetiology. However, labelling theorists stress the point of seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the deviant individual. They claim that when a person becomes known as a deviant, and is ascribed deviant behaviour patterns, it is as much, if not more, to do with the way they have been stigmatized, then the deviant act they are said to have committed. In addition, Howard S. Becker (1963), one of the earlier interaction theorists, claimed that, "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders". Furthermore, the labelling theoretical approach to deviance concentrates on the social reaction to deviance committed by individuals, as well as, the interaction processes leading up to the labelling.
After reading all four articles, it has come to my attention that deviant behavior is everywhere in our society, and all around the world. Different cultures have different norms and morals making things we believe are normal, deviant. Deviance can be seen in everything, sexual intercourse, rock n roll, and even so much as technology.
We live today in the societies which are shaped by rules and norms that must be follow. At the same time, people establish their own way to do things or not and when these people break or not respect the established rules, that’s is called deviance. According to Henslin “Deviance is the violation of norms (rules or expectations)”. I will define deviance as set of behaviors that are beyond the rules accepted by society or a group of people.
Social deviance is when people who are faced with social norms either choose to conform or to rebel
Deviant behavior is sociologically defined as, when someone departs from the “norms”. Most of the time when someone says deviance they think against the law or acting out in a negative behavior. To sociologists it can be both positive and negative. While most crimes are deviant, they are not always. Norms can be classified into two categories, mores and folkways. Mores are informal rules that are not written; when mores are broken, they can have serious punishments and sanctions. Folkways are informal rules that are just expected to be followed, but have no real repercussions.
There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.
Societies are founded on various social norms. Norms can best be defined as a set of acceptable attitudes and practices by a given society. These norms however are found to vary from one society or cultural setting o the other. Deviance on the other hand is simply when one does something that goes against the set societal norms. Deviance is gauged on a scale of attitudes and behavior contradicting to acceptable social standards (Samuels, 2012).
Goode, E 2006, 'IS THE DEVIANCE CONCEPT STILL RELEVANT TO SOCIOLOGY?', Sociological Spectrum, 26, 6, pp. 547-558, SocINDEX with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 June 2014.
Whatever the term deviance creates , in general it is popularly assumed that 'deviants' are individuals who are somehow less capable, less socially responsible, less adjusted, and consequently less useful to society than their more fortunate, upright and 'normal' fellows ( Social Deviance in Australia, p 4). In the case of Aboriginal drinking, alcohol is the main source of criminalisation and incarceration. This public labelling gives the individual an entirely new status- one which tends to dominate the person's self conception. Once this assumes a 'master status' it becomes the major reference for personal identity and relegates all to other 'normal' characteristics to a subsidiary status. This process insures that characteristics such as sexual preference, comes to intrude upon and influence almost their entire existence. Once identified publicly, (homosexuals), the person is treated differently and expected to behave differently (Study guide p18). The creation of deviance according to Merton is seen as the responsibility of society ( or the law abiding and respectable members of society) and of the official agents of social control ( police, magistrates, social workers, teachers, judges, doctors and psychiatrists) ( Social Deviance in Australia p 5). Merton draws attention to the causal significance of social, economic and cultural factors of all kinds in pushing or pulling certain types of individuals into courses of action which involved rule breaking. Interactionists', however, like Becker are primarily concerned with the role social control plays in the social production of deviance, which may take two main forms- rule making and rule enforcing. As Becker (1963:9) writes: 'social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance... and by applying these rules to particular people and labelling them outsiders. While Quinney states that crime is created. He refers to the social definition of deviance, to the fact that the system of government we have created for ourselves was and is constructed by those who have titled authority and power. Control is exerted through a variety of institutions run by and for the elite (Mass media, education, religion). It is those who are in power who define what is seen as deviant behaviour.
Social deviancy is the violation of social norms. A deviant is someone who rejects folkways and mores. Any action that violates the values or rules of a social group is deviant behavior. In order to actually be characterized as a deviant, the individual must be detected committing a deviant act and be stigmatized by society. A stigma is a mark of social disgrace, setting the deviant apart from the group. Criminality is healthy for society. Deviance affirms our cultural values and norms. Responding to deviance clarifies moral boundaries and brings people together. There will always be people who break society’s rules and that’s important.
...lower. They denote to the individual as such and the individual instigates to discuss to himself. Subordinate deviance outcomes and unconventionality perseveres in the individual. The deviant is obligatory into the establishment of further deviants and their nonconformity is strengthened. One opposition to this model is that certain determined deviants obligate not ever been determined and branded. Nevertheless, the labeling theory similarly originates into outcome when individuals tag themselves, thoughtful of themselves while they reflect others perceive individual. The classification a deviant can distress the unconventional into revulsion at his or her nonconformity, so they will leave deviancy.
Deviance is defined as actions or behaviors that violate socials norms. In turn the concept of deviance is dependent on the social observation and perception. “By it’s very nature, the constructionism through which people define and interpret actions or appearances is always “social.” ”(Henry, 2009 , p. 6) One’s perception of a situation may be completely different from another depending on cultural and social factors. The way someone talks, walks, dresses, and holds themselves are all factors that attribute to how someone perceives another. In some cases what is socially or normally acceptable to one person is deviant in another’s eyes. For this reason there is a lot of gray area involving the topic of deviance because actions and behaviors are so diversely interpreted.
As we all have observed, throughout history each culture or society has unique norms that are acceptable to that group of people. Therefore, to establish and come to the acceptance of these basic norms, each society must develop its’ own strategies and techniques to encourage the fundamentals of behavior, which is clear in our modern society. Most do assume that everyone in a society will follow and respect such norms. However, some tend to deviate from the adequate norms and demonstrate deviant behavior. Nevertheless, we are inclined to ask ourselves, why do people decide to violate such important standards of living?
“Deviant behavior is behavior that violates the normative rules, understandings, or expectations of social systems” (“Deviant Behavior,” 1968). Sociologists that study crime and deviant behavior look at a variety of different things. First, they look at cultural norms and in what ways these cultural norms change. Second, they look at how these cultural norms are enforced. They also look at what would happen to individuals when they break these cultural norms (Crossman, 2015b). Through these observations, sociologists have come up with numerous theories as to what causes deviant behavior.