The research compiled within these five articles, pertaining to body modification and self worth, concluded that the correlation is both valid and apparent in teens, young adults and adults. Currently, societal norms are switching what is deemed to be appropriate. Sociologist have taken an particular interest in this new phenomenon, because we are currently stuck in a split society; while many agree with the new wave of body modification, and have accepted its inevitability, the more conservative values can still be found. This has begun to leave many adults, whom acquire body modification, in a type of limbo, wondering: is this acceptable in society or am I now an “outsider”? On the other hand, the new generation sees body modification as a means to make oneself more attractive; displaying art on their skin is a way of both self-expression and altering their beauty. Both of these generations are seeing a shift in self-esteem pertaining to body modification. The sociological research that will be discussed in this paper shows trends that can be concluded to one sentence: body modifications have not been fully accepted in society, therefor an invalid use of gaining self-esteem, and actually shown to lower ones self worth and appraisal. In each article there were three major connections proving that body modification had little to no influence on positively regarding ones physical beauty. The sociological papers used statistics surrounding mental health issues, deviant behaviour, and negative self-appraisal within their groups of participants to show the correlations with body modification and self worth.
Deviant Behaviors
Many sociologist and academics that study deviant behaviour find there is always an underlying cause to t...
... middle of paper ...
...ing, self-esteem, and body investment in adolescent girls. Adolescence, 37(147), 627-637. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/socabs/docview/195946753/fulltextPDF?accountid=12347
Dukes, R., & Stein, J. (2011). Ink and holes: Correlates and predictive associations of body modification among adolescents. SAGE, 43(4), 1547-1569. doi: 10.1177/0044118X10396638
Irwin, K. (2001). Legitimating the firstattoo: Moral passage through informal interaction. Symbolic Interaction, 24(1), 49-73. doi: 10.1525/si.2001.24.1.49
Kosut, M. (2008). Tattoo narratives: The intersection of the body, self-identity and society. Visual Sociology, 15(1), 79-100. doi: 10.1080/14725860008583817
Silver, E., VanEseltine, M., & Silver, S. (2009). Tattoo acquisition: A prospective longitudinal study of adolescents. Deviant Behavior, 30(1), 511-538. doi: 10.1080/01639620802467771
His work has also made it possible for the non-conformists to know that their attitude towards tattoos is shallow and that in the near future, they are likely to also have tattoos because the rebelliousness is growing. The manner in which people have transformed and embraced the tattoo culture is also so strong that any negative comment against tattoos will be offensive to most people in the society. Brooks work has therefore achieved its aim of enabling people to understand that they have conformed to the tattooing culture.
Kosut, M. (2006). An Ironic Fad: The Commodification And Consumption Of Tattoos. The Journal of Popular Culture, 39(6), 1035-1048. Retrieved November 29, 2013, from http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5931.2006.00333.x
Society has changed in many ways over the years; at one point tattoos were considered unprofessional and disgusting to most people, but today, they are quite common amongst young adults and people who enjoy art. Parents and people of many older generations, sometimes struggle to understand why this new interest in tattoos has been able to consume American culture so quickly. Prior to this boom of interest in tattoos, there were many horror stories that surrounded the subject due to unsanitary tools used and possible diseases a person could catch if a mistake was made. Lois Desocio is one of those adults who has struggled to understand tattoos, especially since her son Alec began to fill his body with them. As Alec’s collection of body art continues
(2014). The Artification of Tattoo: Transformations within a Cultural Field. Cultural Sociology, 8(2), 142. Retrieved from http://www.galileo.usg.edu.
Goode, E. (2011). Constructionist Perspectives of Deviance. Deviant Behavior (Ninth Edition ed., ). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, Inc..
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.
Deviancy may flow into crime if the norm that was violated has been transcribed into law. Sociologists have pondered as to what encourages or causes deviant and criminal behavior in society. Our social structure was laid out before birth and is a framework that gives us direction and limits our behavior. These groups give us messages of conformity or deviance. The messages all add up and steer us toward conforming to society or rebelling against it.
Before the 1950’s theorists focused on what the difference was between deviants and criminals from “normal” citizens. In the 1950’s researchers were more involved exploring meaning and reasons behind deviant acts. This led to the most dominant question in the field of deviance, “what is the structural and culture factors that lead to deviant behavior?” This question is important when studying deviance because there is no clear answer, everyone sees deviance in different ways, and how deviance is created. Short and Meier states that in the 1960’s there was another shift in focus on the subject of deviance. The focus was what causes deviance, the study of reactions to deviance, and the study of rule breaking and rule making. In the 1960’s society was starting to speak out on what they believed should be a rule and what should not; this movement create chaos in the streets. However, it gave us a glimpse into what makes people become deviant, in the case it was the Vietnam War and the government. Short and Meier also write about the three levels that might help us understand were deviance comes from and how people interact to deviance. The first is the micro level, which emphasizes individual characteristics by biological, psychological, and social sciences. The second level is macrosociological that explains culture and
To first understand and study deviant behavior one must have a clear definition of what “deviant” means. Merriam-Webster defines deviant as “departing from some accepted standard of what is normal”. In the sociological study of deviant behavior, there are two distinct schools of thought on why deviant behavior occurs. The first school of thought on deviant behavior is Constructionist, also related to social Determinism. Constructionist is a theory of finding deviant behavior that says deviant behavior is not inherently the same and is defined by the social context. This theory places the cause of deviant behavior on society and the definition of “normal” as to why select behaviors are deemed deviant. The other school of thought is the Positivist
Sociologist utilizes several perspectives to explain individual motivations of deviance with an emphasis on biological, psychiatric, psychoanalytic, and psychological terms. The emergence of these ideals temporarily displaced social disorganization theory, which stresses a rapidly changing environment as the cause of deviant behavior. Social pathology seeks to explain deviance by evaluating conditions or circumstances, uniquely, affecting the individual. Sociological theories recognize the existense of social conditions that produce deviant behavior and how society identifies it.
A persons’ image is vital when meeting someone for the first time. Our peers, employers, family, superiors, even strangers that you walk past can automatically judge someone, and imagine how they present themselves to the world. Tattoos have been predominantly linked with a rebellious attitude and pictured on out of control stereotypes such as rock starts, bikers, sailors, and disobedient teenagers who want nothing more than to hack off their parents. With a new coming of age generation and a step into a more lenient and liberal society these types of patrons still participate in body art but so do doctors, lawyers, or just the run of the mill house mom. Tattoos signify religious beliefs, cultural influence, or each individual’s sole style. Body art is no longer socially offensive, employers are more apt to hiring tatted hopeful applicants, parents are warming up to the idea of their children inking their body and no longer a stranger on the street with a tattoo is necessarily prejudged as a criminal or safety hazard. Tattoos have become more evolved over the years because they have become more of a socially accepted element of the general public.
Symbolism and meaning is by far one of the most important aspects of the tattoo industry. “The abstract emotions and human awareness of emotions show what really is going on in ones life (Johnson)”. For that reason tattooing is a form of self-expression, and can stand for literal interpretations. For the most part these interpretations are the conveying of spiritual meaning, or marking milestones such as life or death” (Johnson). For those who think tattooing is just for looks or put a bad judgment on it, should also realize that ones personal interest reflects upon their lives. “Many individuals get their first tattoos during adolescence or young adulthood.”(Bravermark) Due to the mainstream culture, these traditions traditionally associate with stereotypes. Stereotypes defiantly have a huge impact on life. Which leads to the next point? Whether flaunted or hidden, sought as art or brought out on a whim, the tattoo has left a huge impact on generation after generation.
Jones, Jonathan . "Tattooing: Eye Catching- but are they art?." Guardian 23 September 2011, n.
It has been popular to attribute deviant behaviour to a single cause or factor, such as physical, psychological, environmental etc. There are many different inside influences that are believed to affect the way a child acts both negatively and positively, some of which are as follows : -
The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.