Deviance and Conformity - SOC 224 PDF

Explaining the Deviant Act -​ In the last lecture, we learned about the many objective ways deviance is labelled– suggests that all deviants share a common trait in our society -​ Should be asking why do some people become deviant? Why do some violate norms? -​ How we respond to dev...

Explaining the Deviant Act -​ In the last lecture, we learned about the many objective ways deviance is labelled– suggests that all deviants share a common trait in our society -​ Should be asking why do some people become deviant? Why do some violate norms? -​ How we respond to deviance in society is important as it produces real life consequences for millions of people -​ Affects wether people are criminalized, put in jail, for how long? -​ Affcests wether people are ostracized or shunned from society or on more serious levels -​ Leads to murder and other forms of physical violence Theorizing Deviance -​ Focus on positivist theories of deviance -​ Theories that attempt to explain the causes of deviant behaviour -​ Why do people behave in devious ways? What are the causes behind it? -​ Trace changes to positiivist understandings Sin and evil spirits → biological → social * in the past deviance used to be blamed on evil spirits and the devil, since then our understandings have swirhced to more biological explanations of deviance (or human makeup that led to some humans being deviant whhile others were not), the more researched understanding points more towards social explanations -​ In addition to the social aspects there are also psychological aspects, there are many differe aspects of our brain and thinking that can lead to deviance -​ Focus on how our societes, and social interactions, socialization affect our deviance Pre-18th Century HTeories of Deviance -​ Theories of deviance inspired by religious beliefs and superstition: -​ Belief in evil spirits and magic -​ People ascribed unusual phenomena of nature to the activities of evil spirits -​ Belief that any pathology in human behaviour must be due to evil spirits -​ At the time there were not many scoientific understandings of things so anything even somewhat unexplainable was ascribed to being due to vil spiritsm, which translated into any pathology of people as well -​ Any different way of behaving was epxlained as being the result of evil spirits -​ Before 18th century the beliefs about these unusual behaviours were rooted in judeo-christian beliefs -​ Judeo-Christian teachings offer 2 explanations for the role evil spirits played in sinful behaviour: -​ Temptation → as human we possess free will, we can behave how we want and choose our bejaviour- the alleged devil may temt us to behave in bad ways todo devious things. The very religious are bale to reisit the temptation by hanging on to their fate (resist temptation through religion)  -​ Possession → people that have done wrong things only ebhvae in devious ways are possessed by evil spirits, take over theri behaviour and actions -​ To determine if they were possede wer trial by fire, often fatal attempts to try and rid the body of the evil -​ Blaming social problems on the devil and other evil spirits was a means to achieve 2 objectives 1.​ It diverted attention from the failing of elites and place blame on individuals who were ‘possessd’ by the devil -​ At the time people were upset about the falures in society and blamed rich and powerful for various social ills -​ If the richa nd poewrfula re able to frame the problem as bing due to the devil or evil spirits it takes the attention away form them and direct attnetion to those that are allegedly possessed 2.​ Those in power made themselves indispensable by saying only they could stop the devil -​ Distincitons between what was sinful from religious perspective and what was criminal were blurred–led to rise of confluence of religious authority -​ Now have more of a seprartion between what is civil and the law, and what is a religious teaching, at this tie, deviance wa basically the smae thing as sin which wa basically the same thing as crime– no distinctio between the ctegories -​ The distinction between sin and crime was blurred -​ Confluence of civil and religious authirity -​ Those challenging the status quo were branded as heretics and subject to extreme punishment → governance through fear, system is set up to blame things on the devil and on evil spirits anything that then challenged the atstaius quo was branded as a heretic (subject to extreme punishment) -​ Heretic– anyone that challenges the doctrine of the church, anyone ho questioned these ideas, were labbled as a bad person as a deviant and someone who needed to be dealt with -​ Inquisition → many people ut to death over 300 years -​ Wihces become a scapegoat for anger -​ The accused were mostly women– women that went aginst the church pr dont follow societal norms- more likey to occur to women that lived independently and withot protection of traditional male relationship (father or husband) -​ Independent women were labelled dangerous to the socil hierarchy = widespread withc hunts, meant to reinforce pre exisitng hierarchy -​ Withch hunts reinforced the power of existing soical hierarchy -​ Burning witches alive -​ Death by hanging ​ The Enlightenment→ the scientific revolution resulted in many changes to thinking and therefore resulted in a restrucitng of society–important developments in math, science, astronomy, biology, etc. dutingg 18th century -​ Focus on systematic doubt, empirical and sensory verification of ideas -​ Systematic doubt = the idea that we dont just believe anything people twell us, and approach things cautiously and generally doubt things until they can be proven true -​ Focus on the study of empirical ideas, not just about the creation o theorie s but also empirically testing them -​ Ideas shifted away from fanaticism and religious superstition to naturalistic explanations based on reason and the scientific method (observation) -​ Use them to improve society Cesare Lombrose and the Positive School: -​ Attempted to find scientific objectivity for the measurement and quantification of criminal behaviour -​ Through science we can s omehow measure criminal behvaiour in order to respond -​ Interested in stufying solders– wanted to tell if there was a difference in the soldiers that he could physically see based on the region of where their from -​ Lambroso’s Tattoed Men -​ Found a positive correlation between soldiers that have tattoos and soliders that violated military and civil social rules and laws -​ Soldiers that had tatoos were morel ikely to brek rules and laws in society -​ Skulls of ‘Criinal Men’ and atavists -​ Studied italian pirosners -​ Methods included measuring the size of one’s skull -​ Interested in length of people arms- believed that depending on length of wingspan this would indicate criminality -​ Fascinated by the jaw, the promincen of jawline -​ Tried to use these measure ments to develop a theory of criminal behaviour– tried to explain why some people are criminal and why others arent -​ His ultimate theory was that criminals are born that way -​ Lombroso and the positive school -​ Observed physical differences between criminals and non-criminals -​ Applied Charles Darwin’s evolutionary theory to criminals who were deemed atavists (less evolved) -​ Criminals were a lower form of life, alower form of evolutionary life closer to our apelike ancestors -​ They are born criminals who can be distinguished by stigmata: the physical signs of their atavism  -​ Something about their physical makeup led them to beome criminals -​ Crimnals were not as evolved as non-criminals (not fully human- biological throwbacks→ atavists) -​ Criinals were atavistic and therefore less evolved -​ Different types of offenders have different stigmata (physical signs of atavism- evolutonary backwrdness and criminality) -​ Traitsincluded : many facial dentications, brian capacity, pronounced jaws, eyebrows, and tattoos -​ Ex. robbers have small, shifting, quick moving eyes -​ Strong canine teeth→ criminals needed to eat and tear raw meet -​ Wingspan larger than therir height→ due to more similar to apes and spes use their arms to move -​ If born with any of these stigmata = born criminal -​ Women had fewer stigmata than men and were closer to their primitive origins -​ But less criminal -​ Sexiat views that believed women were more maternal, pious, and gnerely lacked passion– -​ The prostitute for lombroso was the worst criminal thye could be -​ Lombroso was the first to study large groups of people to find similarities and differences between them- brought in the scientific method to the study of deviace and criminality that did not exist prior to his work ​ Theorizing Deviance ​ ​ Biological theories of deviance → Social theories of deviance ​ ​ Positivist Theories → try to explain why people act in a specific way, find generalizable and universally applicable laws to human behaviour (these theories of deviance are storngly rooted in attempts to ocntrol people) -​ Functionalist theories: -​ Anomie theory -​ Strain theory -​ Differential opportunity theory -​ Status frustration theory -​ Learning theories: -​ Differential association theory -​ Neutralization theory -​ Social learning theory -​ Social control theories -​ Social bonds theory -​ Self-control theory 1)​ Functionalist Theory → highly important and dominated till md 20th centry -​ social structure creates deviance  -​Determines what structure in society has become dysfunctional to cause people to breka the rules -​ core assumptions: -​ Social structures fulfill functions -​ Composed of vairous structures– the family unit, education system, political system, each of these systems fulfil a necessary function for the smoothe running of society -​ Society is based on consensus -​ All agree on the rules and that these rules are good and should be followed -​ All agree one hat is good for the society and all must protect these rules -​ Determine what structures in our society have become dysfunctional that may cause people to break the rules (ephasis on social structure creating deviance) -​ Concern with maintaining the social order → ANOMIE THEORY -​ A certain level of deviance is functional: there needs to be a level of deviance in our everyday world because deviance maintains ocietys balance- a certain level of deviance is good -​ Increases social solidarity –increases our connection- we feel towards each other and ur solidarity we have with our neighbours -​ Helps determine moral boundaries– better able to determine what is good and what is correct? -​ Tests society’s boundaries -​ Reduces societal tensions – gives us an outlet to espond instead of holding feelings in, when someon breaks a rul or commit a crime it gives us an outlet of dealing with this -​ Beyond a certain level, deviance is dysfunctional = anomie (normalessness) -​ Durkheim’s Anomie → the lack of norms increases likelihood that people will be deviant -​ Social solidarity is essential to most societies -​ Shared goals that lead to a set of shared norms -​ In times of rapid social change, social solidarity can break down; no clear societal norms/ values = ANOMIE → we would not know how to act, we feel unguided -​ Ex. industrial revolution -​ Without norms, societies function poorly -​ When social cohension breaks down and social isolation is great, society loses its traditional social control mechanisms → we are unsure of how to behave because everyone has different ideas about what is and is not acceptabe -​ When a social system is in a state of anomie:  -​ No common values and meanings -​ New values and meanings not developed→ a transition period, -​ Soicetys high rate of crime and edeviance led to society suffering to deviance and crime -​ Durkheim: Suicide -​ Sociological factors contribute to changes in suicide rates -​ Argued that cuses of suiced are not individual personlaitiys and individual failures but that suicide was caused bys coai factors -​ Suicide rate varied with time and place -​ If suicide was a result of an individual epersoanlity or individual deficiency then suicide rates would remain stable -​ Rate of suicide changes when social bonds change -​ Rate of suicide increased whe the social bonds between peole in a society are either: too strong or not strong enough -​ Individual and isolated people had a higher tendency for suicide as compared to collective and dense communities -​ 2 factors that influence suicide: 1) social integration 2) moral regualtion -​ People who are more isolated, individalistic are mor elikely to commit suicide compared to those who are part of a collective -​ Social integraiton— how integrated u are to society and ur community -​ Anomic Suicide → includes people who feel morally lost, those with no sense of direction with their lives - relates to people who would rather die than keep feeling the way they do. Ex. teenagers -​ Society that justifies the social order (high social regulation) → each person has appropriate needs/desires for their class → low suicide rates -​ Society that no longer justifies social order (low social regualtion) → no restraint upon people’s aspirations and desires → high suicide rates -​ Egoistic Suicide → those with low soical integration, individuals not stongly connected to chesive social groups, no strong connections with other groups of people–our detachment from society leads to detachment from life ( since society goves meaning to our lives = detachment form others no motivation to keep going with our lives) sont feel part of the greater whole, feel detached and excluded (ex. Elderly who have lost many of their relationships and connections -​ Society with high integration → high value given to human existence → low suicde rates -​ Society with low integration → low value given to human existence → high suicide rates -​ Altruistic sucide → suicide committed for the benefit of their communities, ex. Self-sacrifice during war time  -​ Tends to happen when a group or society have a lot of power over people- ex. Suicide bombers (give theri life for causes they believe in) -​ Fatalistic suicide → when people expereince pervasive oppression, they are oppresed by society around them, they feel like they cant live the life they want to– too regulated, no pint of continuing since u dont have the freedom to live the life u want to ex. Suicide in prison -​ Life is so heavily regualted ut us bi=ot worth liivg anymore -​ Peoiple feel doomed by theri fate, no real future for them → STRAIN THEORY/ MERTON’S ANOMIE * Durkeim didnt believe that deviance simply only came fronthe individual but bout structures of society… Merton used durkeims notion of explaining high crime rates in americn society– Merton reognized there was certain cities or even areas within cities that have higher rates than others = he wanted to redeonve what anomie meant for why dysfunction eists between cultural goals between american society based on accumulation of wealth and legitimate means to reach these goals in society (ex. Gettinga good job, education) legitimate way to get to goals -​ Deviance emerges from the structure of society (what propels people to deviance) -​ If anomie was so widespread (according to Durkheim), why wasnt crime spread out evenly across society? -​ Anomie = dysfunction between cultural goals + legitimate means *nomie happens when there is a dysfunction between the gaol that we want versus the means that we have in order to achieve them -​ Goals more important than means -​ Goals are culturally prescribed -​ Goals that arent invented on our own, but goals that we have learnt through socialization (things that we should aspire to be scuh as money and success) -​ Legitimate means are socially structured -​ Not everyone has equal access o education or good jobs, not everyone has equal acees to networking to get this aspiration -​ The American Dream -​ We all have bought into this idea and work towards achieving these things according to Merton -​ Strain = normative social order creates unequal access to legitimate means -​ Results from the gap between goals and the legitimate means to achieve them (no access to the legitimate means to achieve these goals) -​ Leads to: innovation (usually deviance/crime) – people still want these things but dont have the traditional accepted things to get there and so they have to innovate either through crime or deviance to achieve these goals -​ Micro-Anomie: the individual is in a state of annomie, places more emphasis on self-interest than collective values  -​ Focus on the individual, emphasis on self-interest (what does the individual want that supercedes the collective values) -​ Anomie no longer about normalessness (durkheims approach), but about relative deprivation (Merton) -​ Relative Deprivation vs. Absolute Deprivation -​ Feel deprived because of what other people have relative depraatoion– what matters in context to whats around you, this shifts the context -​ Absolute deprivation – in reference to peopel in dire povert, not about the reference point to others -​ Merton’s Five Models of Adaptation -​ Conformity - accept the cultural roles and the institutional means,often doesnt lead to criminal behvaiour, follow the precribed path -​ Innovation- accept cultural goals but not institutional means which often results in criminal behviour, aspire towards wealth, fame status but dont take the prescribed path to do so (stealing, fraud, something ur not supposed to do) -​ Ritualism- when u dont accept cultural goals but accept institutional means, people that follow their passions and go about things in their own way but dont care about wealth status, only looking to find contentment (dont commit deviance or criminal behvaiour, just go on with their lives) -​ Retreatism- rject both cultural goals and institutional means, people that dont agreew ith the cultural goals bu t they dont are about the institutional means, people who want to drop out of society -​ Rebellion- want to reject cultural goals and institutional means and want to replace them, change how our society is operating, waiting for revolution, replace existing goals and means with new ones, can be motivated by positive goals and ideas not always negative → DIFFERENTIAL OPPORTUNITY THEORY ​ *expanding on Mertons theory, theu agree with Merton, how society is structured results in differential access to legitimate opportunities, not everyone has the same access to achieve things they want in legitimate ways -​ Cloward and Ohlin: -​ Agree that how society is structured results in differential access to legitimate opportunities -​ But, people also have differential access to illegitimate opportunities -​ Some people have different knowledges or technical abilities to commit crimes, not evryone has the same skill set -​ These influence wether or not u commit deviance or wether not u follow laws of society Legitimate Opportunities + Illegitimate Opportunities = Deviance vs. Conformity → STATUS FRUSTRATION THEORY *fizated on how inequalities in society are reproduced in classrooms -​ Structure of society is reproduced in the classroom -​ Schools expect “middle-class behaviours” -​ Expected to speak to teachers and classmates in a particular way, value hard work and that willing to study and learn what teacher is telling you -​ Delayed gratification - have to wait when have nan urge or want -​ Middle-class measuring rod -​ Expectations dont merge well with the reality of lives of poor children -​ Children who grew up in alow-socieconomic area, their wys of operating are different– a layer of toughness in order to survive, oppose the ideals that thyeve been told (cause theyy see how their parent work hard and yet still live in poverty)-- dont see the payoff -​ Similar to strain: status frustration -​ Develop oppositional standards at which they can succeed -​ Unable to measure up to the middle class ideals -​ Frustration encourages them to associate with others who also feel like they cant live up to these expectations- build this oppositional standards -​ Creation of delinquent subculture -​ Immediate gratification -​ Being able to get something when they want by being tough -​ Toughness -​ Opposition 2)​ Learning Theories -​ People learn to be deviant -​ Through same processes that teach conformity  -​ But content and direction of learning differs ​ ​ → DIFFERENTIAL ASSOCIATION THEORY * developed by edwin sutherland -​ Deviant acts are learned behaviour -​ Deviants learn this behvaiour through interactions and communication with others -​ Learn how to be deviant, nothing we are born with but something larned through interactions -​ Primary learning and secondary learning -​ Behaviour deviants learn: -​ Techniques of deviance -​ Direction of motives, rationalizations (make it feel like they are not doing anything wrong), attitudes that characterize that particular form of deviance -​ If people ar exposed to deviant kinds of definitions and deviant learning they are more likely to be deviant ​ ​ → NEUTRALIZATION THEORY -​ Deviance is rationalized by techniques of neutralization -​ Justification of deviant acts through different techniques, that can make us feel better about some of the bad things weve done -​ These techniques are learned -​ Dennial of responsibility → i didnt mean to do it, other causes -​ Denial of injury → downplaying the maount of jharm causes (it wasnt a big deal) -​ denial/blame of the victim → they had it coming, or they should have known better -​ Condemnation of the condemners → people dont have a right to tell u what ur doing is wrong because what theyre doins is wrong -​ Appealing to higher loyalties→ include different moral guideline that u are following that supercedes the societal guideline way of thinking about deviance ​ ​ → SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY *focus on reward, punishment and imitation -​ Most human behaviour is earned observationally through modelling -​ People learn by watching others; we are more likely to engage in behaviours we are rewarded for (behaviour is reinforced) -​ Spend a lto of time watching what people are punished for by doing this we learn what not to in society -​ Likelihood of future actions is based on: -​ Definitions: beliefs about the acceptability of certain behvaiours -​ Differential association: who you associate with -​ Imitation: copying those people/behvaiours -​ Differential reinforcement: rewards and punishment *WHY DO MOST OF US BEHAVE? 3)​ Social Control Theories - why people dont commit crime -​ Most of us are restrained from deviance – experience social control -​ Emphasis is on barriers (or lack thereof) -​ Ex. being a parent, being employed, or a student -​ Deviance is a result of the absence of social control -​ Reducing social control will increase deviance– people are going to choose to act deviatnly if there is nothing in place to make us think twice -​ Core assumptions: -​ Deviance is inherently attractive, yet most of us dont engage in deviance -​ Devance is attractive- people want to be deviant and engage in these behavioura and actions because of the different thing in place such as society that make us think twice -​ Social control is not strog enough -​ Focus attention on what causes conformity, instead of what causes deviance ​ ​ → SOCIAL BONDS THEORY → travis hirschi , social bonds restrain us *strong bonds to conventional society -​ Attachment -​ caring/supervision -​ The idea that we have significant others in our lives (parents, partners, siblings), these people serve as a standard for our behaviour, who we ook to to figure out what the appropriate way of behaving is -​ When we have these emotionl ties, we have communities and institutions that hve really stng authority over us - striongly impacts our ability to conform -​ ‘Reference others’ -​ Standards for behvaiour -​ Any strong attachment can lead to conformity– familial attachment is considered to be most important = someone who is delinquent deos not have these social bonds (havent been able to form attachments to people especially their family members) -​ Involvement -​ Deep commitment to conventional ties - keeps them busy -​ A consequence of commitment- people who have these deeply committed lives in a conventional sense, devote a lot of time to thes e activities -​ Those who lack involvement are free to engage in non productive and devious things -​ If involved in good things dont have time to do bad things, the more time you have to do these sorts of pro-sociala activities, te more time and more likely it is u will engage in crime and deviance  -​ Commitment– how much we have to lose? -​ *mostly in relation to our career aspirations- we may not do things because we want to become a lawyer, or be able to pass a background check -​ A stake in conformity -​ Commitment to jobs? -​ Inconclusive research -​ Belief -​ Acceptance of dominant value system -​ Extent to which u agree with the value system of society and of our groups ​ ​ → SELF-CONTROL THEORY – general theory f crime ​ Board theory that is able to explain all crime and deviance (Godferson and hirschi) as a criticism of social bonds theory -​ Personality differences: why are some people predisposed to deviance? -​ Self-control restrains us from deviance – about the way we are more likely to act in devious ways while ther est are more likey to behave in non deviant ways -​ Delay gratification and control impulsles -​ Low self-control = deviance -​ People that are impulsive, risk-seeking or prefer physical tasks instead of mental, self-centered, quick-tmepered predisposes u to crime and deviance -​ Self-control is determined by parenting → early in life -​ Child-rearing is critical -​ If parenting was not done well in ur life the idea was that children wouldt have good attachments, no discipline -​ Origin of self control is in the family -​ Self- control is relatively stable throughout life -​ Self-Control -​ 5 main assumptions about deviant and/or criminal behvaioiur: 1.​ Assumed to provide more immediate gratification of deisres a.​ Deviant or more criminal behaviour is more likely to satisfy ur desires than non criminal 2.​ Provide easy and simple paths to gratification a.​ Ex. easier to steal than work 40 hrs 3.​ Acts are exciting, risky, thrilling compared to conformity 4.​ Crime provides few long-term benefits a.​ Can interfer with more long term commits such as work or family or friends b.​ Criminals dont have stable and reliable relationships (not always true) 5.​ Most crimes require little skill or planning a.​ Not always true