SOC 224.docx

**Introduction: What is deviance? Chapter 1: Determining Deviance** **Defining Conformity (or normality)** - Conformity = - Acts that are statistically common? - Acts that are harmless? - Acts that society's masses respond to with positive emotions (e.g. joy) - Acts that correspond to societal norms? - Acts that dominant moral codes say are acceptable ? - However, when an act violates or contradicts the dominant moral codes of society, that is referred to as deviance - Deviance and conformity: one cant exist without the other - Existence of one confirms the other - Conformity: acts that are harmless, putting on cloths, food we eat, driving laws - Deviance requires social assumptions, or social control - Society must react, if society doesn't react it is not deviant **What is deviance?** - A deviant is a person, behaviour or characteristic that is socially typed as deviant and subjected to measures of social control - Tacit understandings of acts that are wrong weird or bad - Who is deserving of a deviant title **Types of Deviance** - Negative deviance - Positive Deviance **Social Norms and Deviance** - Social norms: expectations of conduct in particular situations - Norm violations usually result in reactions or sanctions - Norms chanfe deom time to time, place to place **Defining Deviance: The objective/Subjective Dichotomy** - Objectivist views: Deviance as a quality - Subjectivist views: Deviance as a process **Objectivist: Deviance as an act** - The common trait that defines deviance is - Statistical Rarity - Deviance = people, behavioiurs, or characteristics that are statistically rare in a population - Less than 20 percent of Canadians smoke - Few people have green hair - Most people do not commit crimes - Few people belong to white nationalist groups - Physically active: 10.6 males, 1.6 females reach minimal criteria - Limitations - Criteria for rare are ambiguous - 3? 49? 30? - Common acts may be considered unacceptable - Underage drinking is common but prohibited by law - Rare acts may be considered acceptable - Heroic acts, sports prodigies - Harm - Deviance = people behaviours or characteristics that cause harm - [Physical harm]: assault - [Emotional harm]: cyberbullying, negative self-talk - [Social harm]: interfere with the smooth running of society - In Canada, all crimes are considered to harm society itself; the court case is between the Crown (i.e., the state) and the defendant, not the victim and the defendant - economic costs of obesity - [Ontological harm]: a threat to the fundamental ways we understand the world and our place in it - Religious systems provide many with a fundamental way of understanding existence - new religions - Limitations: - Perceptions of harm vary over time - Homosexuality, cannabis use - Perceptions of harm are subjective - E.g. feminists (Canadas famous five), drug prohibition: changing or harming society? - Negative societal reaction - Deviance = people, behaviours or characteristics that societies masses respond to with a negative emotion ((e.g. fear) - Surveys, opinion polls - Elected officials as a proxy - Limitations - Criteria for determining masses are unclear - E.G. 51 percent of people dislike a certain behaviour? - Some people\'s reactions have a greater impact - E.g. a scientist compared to a student - Public opinion matters less than other factors - e.g. political party incentives to create uniformity among members - Our elected politicians are, in theory, considered to be a proxy for public opinion in that their role is to represent the citizens in their ridings. But in practice, our representatives in the legislature or parliament are often expected to vote based on party membership or ideology rather than based on the points of view of their constituents - High vs. Low profile committee? - Normative violation - Deviance = people, behaviours or characteristics that violate societal norms - Today most objectivists perceive norms as being culturally specific rather than universal---that is, based on a given society's moral code rather than on any type of absolute moral order. - Changing views of norms - Absolutist view of norms - Behaviour pr characteristic is inherently and universally deviant - Some norms should be followed in all culture and at all times - Absolute moral order (word of God, the laws of nature, or some other unchangeable source) - Culturally specific view of norms - Norms are culturally specific - Not an absolute moral order - [Norms], as a term for standards or expectations of behaviour, can refer to informal, everyday behaviours such as rules of etiquette, choice of clothing, and behaviour in the university classroom. - These kinds of informal norms are called [folkways], and if you violate these norms, you might be considered odd or rude. Other norms are taken more seriously. - [Mores] are those standards that are often seen as the foundation of morality in a culture, such as prohibitions against certain sexual practices - Limitations: - Lack of consensus over norms - Society is made of many social groups with varied expectations for behaviour - Not all norms are the same: folkways, mores and laws - Does the criminal law reflect consensus - This [consensual view] of law views the law as arising out of social consensus and then equally applied to all. However, some scholars draw our attention to the fact that law creation is a political activity, wherein those norms that are embodied in law reflect the behavioural expectations of only some of its citizens (Siegel & McCormick, 2020). - The [conflict view] claims that the law is a tool used by the ruling class to serve its own interests. Proponents of this view believe that the law is more likely to be applied to members of the powerless classes in society. - The [interactionist view] presents another nonconsensual view of criminal law. This view suggests that society's powerful define the law in response to interest groups that approach them to rectify a perceived social problem - Consensual versus conflict versus interactionist views - High consensus vs. Low consensus deviance - Thio (1983) uses the concepts of [high-consensus] deviance and [low-consensus] deviance to distinguish between forms of deviance that have differential levels of support in the broader society. The norms reflected in criminal law are characterized by relatively more consensus than are society's non-legislative norms (such as norm) governing physical appearance). And within the law, certain laws are characterized by relatively more consensus than are others. **Subjectivist: Deviance as a LABEL** - Deviance = people, behaviours or characteristics that dominant moral codes (normative code) deem unacceptable and in need of control - The foundation for this process lies in the dominant moral codes that serve as the foundation for determining who or what is deviant in society. - Although multiple moral codes coexist, only certain moral codes are reflected in the society's institutions - Thus, certain moral codes attain positions of dominance in society. Groups that hold some levels of power are in the best position to have their own moral codes become dominant. - Social processes involve far more than simply the control and oppression of the powerless by the powerful. The use and legitimization of power interacts with negotiations about moral boundaries---negotiations in which less powerful groups in society are also able to participate. - Deviance is socially constructed - No common objective traits among deviants - Deviance is not a quality but rather a process - People learn what is deemed deviance through socializations - Some moral codes attain positions of dominance - Powerful people have deemed someone as deviant - Referring to the subjective nature of deviance means focusing on deviance as a social construction. **Social constructionism** refers to the perspective proposing that social characteristics (e.g., "thin," "delinquent") are creations or artifacts of a certain society at a specific time in history, just as objects (e.g., houses, cars) are artifacts of that society - [Strict]: postulate a distinct theoretical perspective claiming that the world is characterized by endless relativism, that there is no essential reality in the social world outside of people's experience of it. - Most social constructionists today state that reality does exist but peoples perceptions and experiences can vary - [Contextual]: emphasize the pathways by which certain social phenomena come to be perceived and reacted to in particular ways in a given society at a specific time in history - Viewing social constructionism as a process implies that what is of sociological significance is not the individual behaviour or characteristic itself, but rather 1\. its place in the social order, 2\. the roles assigned to people who exhibit that behaviour or characteristic, and 3\. the meanings attached to that behaviour or characteristic. - **Deviance is constructed by processes that occur on multiple levels** **Subjectivity and the social construction of deviance** - Levels of social construction: 1. [Individual]: own identity, conception of self 2. [Interactional]: friends, family 3. [Institutional]: government, education system, religion 4. [Sociocultural]: beliefs, ideologies, values: community a. Ex/ smoking Restriction of smoking: no advertising, limited viewing, age restriction , vivid warning labels , prohibited in many areas 5. [Global]: globalization: united nations: certain things those countries agree on: makes borders and boundaries irrelevant - **Objectivists** claim that there is a specific quality that necessarily makes a person, behaviour, or characteristic deviant. - Statistical rarity, harm, a negative societal reaction, and normative violation have each been identified as that quality (whether by scholars, laypersons, social activists, or politicians) - **Subjectivists** claim that there is no underlying quality that is inherently deviant; instead, a person, behaviour, or characteristic is deviant if enough important people say so. - Through the processes of social construction, which are influenced by power, dominant moral codes emerge that then serve as the standard against which deviance and normality are judged. - Just as the two sides of the dichotomy are based on different definitions of deviance, they are based on varying definitions of conformity or normality as well **The Objective-Subjective Continuum** - 1.2 the objective- subjective continuum - In philosophical debates about the nature of moral truth, the objective and the subjective are often presented as mutually exclusive. - many philosophers argue that it is a false dichotomy - **objectivists** have changed their conceptions of norms from that of an absolute moral order to that of a culturally specific moral order. - Similarly, over time, **subjectivists** have come to use the concept of norms but refer to expectations that are socially constructed and determined by processes of power. - Dichotomy: opposites - Rather than looking at it from this view we look at it as a continuum with each being the extreme views of deviance - Deviance scholars who lean toward objectivism may be more likely to study those forms of deviance that Thio (1983) referred to as high-consensus forms of deviance, such as homicide, gang membership, white-collar crime, and police corruption. Those who lean toward subjectivism may be more likely to study those forms of deviance that Thio referred to as low-consensus forms of deviance, such as cannabis use, pornography, sexual fetish communities, gambling, and aspects of physical appearance (e.g., tattoos, body piercing, hair colour). **D. Studying Deviance** - Deviance specialists who lean toward the more [subjective] end of the continuum are less interested in shining their analytical spotlight on the act itself and more interested in shining it on [society and social processes]---the perceptions of and reactions to the act as well as the role of power in constructing those perceptions and reactions. - The focus of this type of analysis becomes the "deviance dance"---the interactions, negotiations, and debates among groups with different perceptions of whether a behaviour or characteristic is deviant and needs to be socially controlled and, if so, how. - Objective approach: studying the act - Looking at things in consensus - Subjective approach: studying social processes - Idea that people can have different perceptions or reactions **1. Studying the Act-Objective Approach** - Objective end of the continuum - Focus on the deviant acts - Those acts have an inherently deviant quality (e.g., normative violation) - E.g. why do people join white nationalist groups if they know that racism violates Canadian norms? - If we all agree that racism/sexual violence/kidnapping is deviant, why does it exist? - Subjective approach attempts to explain this **2. Studying social processes -- Subjective approach** - Subjective end of the continuum - Focus on our perceptions of and reactions to the act - Emphasis on the [deviance dance] - Dance or process: debate, argument, different views: - some dances are cooperative, - dances can change, just as dance changes - Importance of power relations -- [moral entrepreneurs] - Moral entrepreneurs are individuals or groups who identify a social problem and then try to mobilize resources to address that problem - Interest groups act as moral entrepreneurs - Deviance is not criminality: abortion is not a crime here - In the community people could see it as deviant if it is legal - Different views and perspectives: **The role of power in moral code of society** - Some individuals have more power than others - E.g., a billionaire vs. a person who is homeless - Politician who makes laws would more likely to decriminalize their own illegal actions than make it illegal - Some groups have more power than others - E.g., based on hierarchies of inequality in society - Power also lies in social institutions - Government, science, religion, media , commercial enterprise - People don't make own decision, influenced by media, advertisements, narratives pushed by powerful people - [Science]: another agent of institutionalized power is granted more creditability - [Religious institutions, ] - [media (]battleground for moral codes, used by moral entrepreneurs and as a moral entrepreneur itself: ex/ vaping related illness, it contributes to the construction of vaping as a deviant activity) - [Commercial enterprise]: profit motive most components of media are commercial enterprises - Class discussion: who do you think should determine the moral code of society? and why? **3. Studying Acts and social processes: the social typing process** - The social typing process is the process by which a person, behaviour or characteristic is deviantized - The process by which some people come to be seen as deviant and others come to be seen as normal reveals what Rubington and Weinberg (2008) label [social typing] - Three components 1. [Description (the label)] a. Terrorist, heretic (lol) 2. [Evaluation (the judgement)] b. Evil, bad c. Think of as an adjective 3. [Prescription (social control/regulation emerge)] d. Belong in jail e. How to correct the act (prescription /medication to heal from ailment/deviance) **Forms of Social control** - Formal vs. informal - Retroactive vs. preventative - Punishment; retroactive: learn from others who have been deviant - It has already happened, so when a person is punished it is retroactive because they got caught - Preventative: cameras: you will be seen, seeing cops or security; locking your house, - Control of others vs. control of self - Presence of boss or supervisor: there to guide behaviour and prevent deviant act - Control of self: as a student -- come to class, study, wake up and go to class **Resistance to the Social Typing Process** - Occurs at the macro (societal) level and micro (individual interaction) level - Must undergo some resistance for change to occur - Women can vote because women couldn't and women voting was considered deviant: now it is normal for women to vote - Homosexuality was deviant till later - Resistance is important in changing what is normal and not normal - Varies across cultures and over time - Takes many forms - E.g. protests, art, naming of people and places **Social control can be:** - Formal VS Informal - (Becker, 1963;Edwards, 1988; Rubington & Weinberg, 2008). - The [informal] aspect of the prescription component emerges at the level of patterns of informal social interaction---pattern of interaction with diverse people, such as family members, friends, acquaintances colleagues, or strangers. As you go about your day seeing many different people, you react to them and interact with them in various ways. You may smile at, frown at, start, tease, laugh at, agree with, disagree with, talk to, avoid, ignore, criticize, applaud them, and more. These are all means by which informal regulation or informal social control can occur. - Informal regulation constitutes much of our daily lives today, and prior to industrialization it served as the dominant way in which deviance was controlled - Formal regulation or formal social control involves processing at some type of an organizational or institutional level. - Prior to industrialization in the Western world, church prohibitions served as the central means of formal social control - Dress code - [Retroactive VS preventative] - Retroactive: treating a known deviant in a certainway - Trying to prevent deviance int he first place - But the principal role of power in this process ultimately means that some people's claims count more than other people's and that some people's claims have a greater bearing on the society at large---its expectations, its structure, its institutions, and its people. - The consequences of the social typing process, whereby a person, behaviour, or characteristic becomes typed as deviant or is deviantized, are far-reaching.\\ - "description becomes prescription, which is then transformed into a desirable standard of normal behaviour to be upheld and maintained by the educational system, the religious system, the legal system, and of course the psychotherapeutic system, and to which every section of the population has to measure up or be found deficient" (Freud, 1999, p. 2). - Some people become criminalized (when the context for the social typing process is the criminal justice system); some are medicalized (when the context for the social typing process is medical or psychiatric science); and others are deviantized in a variety of additional ways. **Resisting the social typing process** - Wherever we see instances of social control, we are likely to see forms of resistance, which also reflect the deviance dance. - Simply continuing to engage in a behaviour that has been socially typed as deviant constitutes a form of resistance. - Rhythm of resistance: - Subtle resistance - Gandi used silence as a form of disagreement or protest - Naming places - Through the social typing process, certain people, behaviours, or characteristics are deviantized and subjected to measures of social control. In response to those measures, we often see acts of resistance, which can take varied forms - More objectivist scholars state that the social typing process takes place because certain behaviours are inherently problematic (e.g., because they are rare or cause harm). - More subjectivist scholars propose that social typing is part of a larger process of social construction, whereby we come to perceive specific behaviours in certain ways---a process that is intertwined with power relations in society. **Key points:** - Varied definitions of deviance fall along the objective -- subjective continuum - Objectivist scholars study the deviant act - Subjectivist Scholars study our perceptions of and reactions to the act **Explaining Deviance I: Positive Theories** **Discussion outline** a. Introduction: Theorizing deviance b. Why do people become deviant c. Functionalist theories: The social structure creates deviance d. Learning theories people learn to be deviant e. Control Theories: what restrains most of us from deviance? - Cesare Lombroso: explained criminality based on evolution - Criminals were **atavists**: evolutionary throwback whose biology prevented them from conforming to societies rules - Hereditary - Deviance specialists use a wide range of theories - Core sociological theories (e.g. Conflict theory) - Theories specific to criminal and non-criminal deviance (e.g. strain theory) - Interdisciplinary theories (feminist theories) - Blind mans explanation - Poem: the blind men and the elephanta - An area of focus within each sociological theory may be easily explainable but areas are outside of the focal range rae explained t a lesser extent if at all **Introduction: Theorizing Deviance** - **Atavism**: evolutionary - People who are deviant inherited it - **Stigmata**: certain features make certain people more likely to be deviant **Theorizing Deviance: The objective-subjective continuum** - Those with more [objective] interests: - Study the deviant person, behaviour or characteristic - **Positivist approach** - Those with more [subjective] interests - Study perceptions of and reactions to the act - Interpretive and critical approaches (chapter 3) - Why do people become deviant? Positivist approaches - **Functionalist theories** - **Learning theories** - **Control theories** **Positive approaches** - Positivist approaches to theory building establish cause effect relationships - Modelled after natural sciences - Rules that govern social environment - Seek to explain why people act in certain ways - The variables or social factors that are associated with a certain behaviour **Functionalist Theories: The Social Structure creates deviance (also called structural functionalist theories)** - Core assumptions: - Society is seen as comprising of various structures, each fulfills necessary functions for the smooth running of social order - Social structures fulfill functions à [manifest functions] and [latent functions] - **Manifest**: intended and recognized - **Latent**: unintentional, unrecognized - Merton : built upon and moved away from Durkheims ideas (aeonimie and strain theory) - Manifest function of school: learn - Latent function of school: make friends, fall in love - Society is based on consensus - Law Reflects the consensus of society - Concern with maintaining the social order - Rules are functional: they exist because we agree that they should exist - They should exist because they serve a useful function for society - Then why don\'t some people follow the rules? **Durkheim Anomie Theory** - Anomie can make people deviate - When things are working out well for you, you are not going to deviate 1. certain level of deviance is functional for society 2. addressed deviance in the context of dysfunctional levels of deviance that occur when society changes too quicky - Ways deviance can be functional - [Increase social solidarity]: - Fight back against people who break rules - A society [determines what its moral boundaries are] - [Tests societies boundaries] - [reducing societal tensions] - 1\. Scapegoat: - 2\. small acts of minor deviance act as a safety valve to blow off some steam (Parsons and Smelser) - Activates social processes that return the deviant actors to their acceptable roles in society - [Socialization]: deviant actors who are letting of steam have internalized societies rules sufficiently that they return to their legitimate social roles - [Persuasion]: advertising, sermons of religious leaders, psychologists - [Profit]: teaches citizens that there is a payoff or benefit accorded to those who conform to societies rules - [Coercion]: punishment for those who do not return to their legitimate social roles **Deviance and Social Solidarity** - We come together: right after tragic event people report higher social solidarity, after a year less social solidarity but still higher than before the incident - Functionality of deviance: a. Kai Erikson's (1966) classic analysis of the Puritans of the Massachusetts Bay Colony reveals that acts of deviance helped to reinforce the moral boundaries of their community b. Anne Hutchinson i. Hutchinson's deviance reminded others of what the rules were; the severe consequences she faced by breaking those rules pointed to the importance of those rules. ii. The role of deviance in testing society's boundaries and facilitating changes in outdated rules can be seen historically: Anne Hutchinson eventually came to be seen as a champion of women's rights and religious freedom - Deviance is only functional to a certain point ends up interfering with - Durkheim observed that the processes of industrialization and urbanization, with their growing emphasis on individuality, were causing more deviance---wherein deviance exceeded a functional level. - suicide rates - higher in more individualistic communities characterized by less **social integration** (i.e., cohesion or social bonds) - lower levels of **moral regulation** (i.e., the enforcement of society's norms). - Before industrialization, he theorized, society's structure was held together by **mechanical solidarit**y---that is, society was bonded together by likeness or by a collective commitment to conformity - With industrialization, the bonding mechanism for social structure was transformed into one of **organic solidarity**---society was bonded together by difference or interdependence through a highly specialized division of labour - Interactions among people in this type of society are somewhat impersonal, based primarily on our dependence on others because of the degree of specialization in the division of labour. A collective way of thinking and interacting is replaced by individualism. - Traditional norms deteriorate, processes of social control decline, and institutions become dysfunctional---a situation of **anomie** emerges - when social change occurs at too rapid a pace, individualism gets out of control, and bonds between people become weaker than is necessary for the well-being of society - anomie is inherent in the economic advancements and economic crises that characterize trade and commerce. This applies not only to the period of industrialization that he studied but also to later economic advancements and crises **Durkheim's Anomie Theory: The problem of too much social change** - Beyond a certain level, deviance is dysfunctional - [Mechanical solidarity] [à organic solidarity] - Mechanical: brings people together in villages, similarities, homogeneity - Organic: city life - Rapid social change creates [anomie] - Traditional norms deteriorate - Processes of social control decline - Institutions become dysfunctional - What does an anomic society look like? - A society where everyone is fighting for themselves, - Self-enhancing values succeed self-transcending values - Self-enhancing: about self - Self-transcending: care about group - Walberg and colleagues (cited in McKee, 2002) - after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, - anomic disorder was created by the swift transition from communism to capitalism, with implications for substance abuse. - Rapid social change facilitated greater demand for alcohol and illegal drugs because of weakened social cohesion; - In addition it improved the supply of such substances because of diminished moral regulation in the form of police and government corruption. - Mortality rates (due to alcohol abuse) and crime rates increased, especially in urban areas characterized by weaker family and social networks. - Su et al. (2019) analyzed anomic disorder in China arising from rapid economic change - "The Communist era values of collectivism and spirit of dedication have transformed into market-oriented ones. - The gap between rich and poor has widened, and Chinese society now finds itself adrift in a sea of anomie" (p. 62). - At an individual level, in those parts of China characterized by greater economic development, people emphasize personal interests over moral values or the collective good - Would act in immoral ways if it gave them a personal advantage **Merton's anomie and Strain Theories: The North American Dream Gone Awry (classic strain theory)** - He proposed that deviance originates from both the: - macro level (of larger social structures and processes) - At the macro level, characteristics of the social structure are important. - micro level (of individual choices and experiences). - At the micro level, individual adaptations to these structural characteristics propel some people into deviance. - [Institutionalized goals] + [legitimate means] - Institutionalized goals: taught we are SUPPOSED TO WANT TO Achieve: WEALTH, POWER, PRESTIGE - i.e. success - Legitimate means to achieving institutionalized goals? - Good education, high paying job, inherit money or wealthy family - [Anomie] = goals more important than the means - [Strain] = normative social order creates unequal access to legitimate means - A context of anomie has emerged that Merton describes as an imbalance between culturally prescribed goals and legitimate means, whereby society's emphasis on the goals of wealth, power, and prestige exceeds the emphasis on the means of achieving those goals. - attaining the institutionalized goals is more important than how one attains them. - Messner and Rosenfeld (2013) propose it is because of the dominance of economic institutions (with their emphasis on competition and success) that anomie characterizes North American society: As economic institutions come to dominate other institutions (e.g., family, religion), economic values come to infiltrate those institutions as well. - Structural constraints for some people: - Not everyone has wqual access to legitimate opportunities - Ex/ some kids have better access to legitimate means of achieving institutionalized goals: safe home, extracurricular ACTIVITIES - The blocked opportunities that exist in some parts of the social structure create a **strain** between the goals and the means for people who live there. - The theory proposes that people can adapt to the gap between goals and means in five different ways; according to the theory, four of these modes of adaptation are deviant in nature. **Merton's Anomie and Strain Theories: Models of Adaptation** +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | Method of adjustment | Cultural goals | Means | +=======================+=======================+=======================+ | **Conformity**: | \+ | \+ | | accepts both | | | | institutionalized | | | | goals and means | | | | | | | | NOT DEVIANT | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Ritualism**: given | \- | \+ | | up or reduced goals, | | | | but engages in | | | | legitimate means. | | | | I.e. never missing a | | | | day of work | | | | | | | | DEVIANT BY VIRTUE OF | | | | GIVING UP ON | | | | INSTITUTIONALIZED | | | | GOALS | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Innovation**: | \+ | \- | | accepts goals, | | | | rejects means i.e. | | | | selling drugs to | | | | become wealthy. | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Retreatism**: | \- | \- | | reject goals and | | | | means e.g. drug | | | | affects | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ | **Rebellion** : | -/+ | -/+ | | reject both | | | | institutionalized | | | | goals and legitimate | | | | means but instead | | | | substitute new goals | | | | and means | | | | | | | | e.g. people with | | | | vision of different | | | | world | | | +-----------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+ **Rebelling against environmental pollution** - Ex/ Students protesting for environment - Ex/ Most infrastructure is based off oil and gas industry, we want change but at the same time how can we survive - These examples illustrate how the five modes of adaptation outlined in this theory allow people to adapt to the gap between institutionalized goals and legitimate means and how some people are led into deviance---whether through ritualism, rebellion, retreatism, or innovation. - According to the theory, the current structure of society creates this gap, more so for some groups of people in society than for others. This is why some people engage in deviance. - Both functionalist theories (Durk and Merton) suggest parts of the structure of society may become dysfunctional in some way and result in deviant behaviour on the part of some people **Differential opportunity theory access to the illegitimate world by Cloward and Ohlin** - Extends Merton\'s strain theory: - Suggests the way society is structured results in differential access to legitimate opportunities - Social structure" some people have more access to illegitimate means - Because of differential access to both legitimate and illegitimate opportunities, some people are more likely to participate in deviant subcultures. - [Criminal gangs]: criminal behaviour much like small business - [Retreatist gangs:] drug user groups - [Conflict gangs]: FOB vs FK - All three of these instances are a consequence of the opportunities that are available in the community - Being a part of this environment makes certain illegitimate opportunities easily available. - privilege: not everyone has the same opportunities - Strain: some people are fine while others are not - Deviance and normality - Just like you can have legitimate opportunities you can also have illegitimate opportunities: - Social class/ environment - Friends/ cohort - Difference between deviance and conformity is different opportunities - Different opportunities will cause you to deviate or conform - general strain theory also focuses on the roles played by structure and strain in creating deviance but suggests that they interact with social psychological factors **General strain Theory: Coping strategies** - Robert Agnew (1992, 2001, 2006) has also expanded upon Merton's strain theory, developing a general strain theory that is one of the most commonly used positivist theories in the study of deviance today - **First, it extends the notion of strain by identifying a number of possible sources.** - Merton stated that strain emerges when the social structure places limitations on people's access to the means of achieving positively valued goals. - However, general strain theory proposes that strain can be produced by a variety of processes. - While it can occur when we are unable to achieve goals (e.g., failing a course), it may also arise when valued stimuli are removed (e.g., the loss of a job or the dissolution of a marriage) or when negative stimuli are presented (e.g., being teased at school or living in a conflict-ridden family). - Research illustrates the [multifaceted nature of strain] - health problems, financial difficulties, negative life events within families, criminal victimization, being bullied, vicarious victimization (e.g., knowing someone who has been victimized by bullying or crime), being suspended from school, and experiencing discrimination can all be associated with a variety of deviant behaviours---both criminal (i.e., offending) and non- criminal - **Secondly, general strain theory argues that strain is not sufficient in itself to produce deviance;** there are many people who experience strain who do not engage in deviant behaviour. - Instead, strain creates **negative affect** (negative emotions) such as anger, depression, or anxiety. - Thus, Martinez (2017) finds that depression and anxiety mediate the relationship between strain and resultant alcohol abuse and delinquency among American adolescents - Strain is especially likely to create negative affect if it is perceived as unjust, if it is severe, and if the individual lacks control over the situation---for instance, in cases of bullying or racial discrimination - Strain is especially likely to create negative affect if it is perceived as unjust, if it is severe, and if the individual lacks control over the situation---for instance, in cases of bullying or racial discrimination - Individuals will attempt to ameliorate these negative emotions and may use one (or more) of three different strategies; in some cases, these strategies result in deviance, while at other times they do not - **Cognitive coping strategies** - Think about the strain differently - **Emotional coping strategies** - Reduce the negative emotions - Deviant or conforming in nature - Ex/go for a walk, drink some alcohol - **Behavioural coping strategies** - Change the source of the strain - Ex/ failed test: go to workshop or cheat - Ex/ unhealthy diets : - Cognitive reinterpretations: may come more easily to some people than others **Status Frustration Theory the middle class Classroom** - **Status frustration** theory by Cohen (1955) argues that school inequalities reflect societal structures, leading to delinquent behaviors among lower-class boys. - **Middle-class** norms in classrooms create a **measuring rod** that lower-class boys struggle to meet. - Values like delayed gratification clash with their lives, leading to **mutual conversion** and the formation of oppositional standards, such as hedonism and deviant behaviors. - Research now focuses on post-secondary level, where working-class students may face similar challenges due to middle-class norms and unequal opportunities. - O'Donnell and Blankenship (2018) propose that, although admission to university is based on grades rather than socioeconomic status, not all university students face equal opportunities. - The value of independence (e.g., independent thought) is reflected in the university curriculum, but lower-class communities are more likely to emphasize interdependence and community - Furthermore, students from middle-class families are more likely to have some financial support from parents, which enables them to focus more time and attention on their studies and extracurricular activities. In contrast, students from lower-class families are more likely to be employed during the school year, leaving them less time for school-related endeavours. Being less involved in the university community and struggling to find time for their studies, lower-class students tend to have less prestigious career goals and are less likely to finish their degrees. - As a measure of deviance, O'Donnell and Blankenship found that lower-class university students were also more likely to use drugs---which reflects the hedonistic oppositional standard proposed within the theory. **Limitations of Functionalist Theories** - Critiques of functionalist logic - [Teleological] and [tautological] reasoning - Critiques of functionalist ideology - Inherently supportive of the status quo - Critiques of functionalist bias - Deviance as a lower class phenomenon - [Androcentric] bias - Various theorists, such as Durkheim, Merton, and others, have applied functionalist assumptions to explain deviance. - Durkheim\'s anomie theory discusses how rapid social change can lead to dysfunction. - Merton\'s theories focus on the gap between societal goals and means, particularly affecting certain social groups. - Other theories, like differential opportunity theory and general strain theory, extend these ideas to include access to legitimate and illegitimate opportunities. - However, functionalist theories have faced criticism for their logic, ideology, and biases. - **Critiques of functional logic:** Critics argue that functionalism is **teleological (related to goals)** and **tautological(circular)** , explaining societal institutions based on their functions without considering alternative explanations. - Teleological: the emergence of social institutions is explained in terms of the functions they serve - critics argue that functionalism is not able to explain why that specific institution, at the exclusion of others, is required to achieve particular societal goals. Why is family required for the socialization of children, when there are other institutions (such as the education system) that socialize children as well? If other institutions can fulfill that same function, then functionalism really has not explained the need for the family at all. - Tautological: where the whole is described in terms of its parts, - **Critiques of Functionalist ideology:** The ideology of functionalism is also criticized for supporting inequalities and ignoring historical contexts. - The presumption of functionality (the idea that society's structure is somehow useful) also contributes to the critique of functionalism's conservative bias - For example, strain theorists point out that society is structured in a way that results in differential opportunities and resources for people located in various parts of the social structure, but they do not identify an unequal structure as being problematic or in need of reform. - functionalist theories have been accused of biases related to social class, criminal behavior, and gender. - Merton relied on crime statistics; underrepresentation of upper/middle class - Non criminal forms of deviance i.e. self harm - Scholars have addressed these critiques by expanding theories, such as general strain theory, to include a wider range of sources of strain, forms of deviance, and considerations of gender. - Despite criticism, functionalist theories, especially general strain theory, have seen a resurgence due to recent reforms and empirical analyses addressing these critiques. The strain of policing - Many police officers struggle to achieve the institutionalized goal of being seen as the \"noble, masculine, \'crime-fighter\'\" portrayed in mass media due to obstacles such as inadequate resources, lack of support from the criminal justice system, and public reluctance to assist investigations. - Some officers may resort to deviant modes of adaptation - **innovation** (using questionable means to achieve noble ends) - **ritualism** (scaling back goals while acting legitimately) - **retreatism** (rejecting both goals and means), and rebellion (replacing goals and means with \"street justice\"). - Examples of **rebellion** include taking bribes, corruption, and acts of brutality, such as the \"starlight tours\" conducted by Saskatoon police officers on Indigenous individuals. Despite formal inquiries into such cases, criminal charges have not been brought against the officers involved. **Learning Theories: People learn to be Deviant** - Explain deviant behaviour because of a learning process - Core assumptions - Processes of learning cause deviance - Different learning processes are highlighted by various learning theories - Strands of the learning theory of deviance are discussed below - Edwin Sutherland\'s **theory of differential association** explains how deviant behavior is learned through interactions in small, intimate groups where individuals are exposed to deviant definitions more than conforming ones, leading them to engage in deviant behaviors. - Within these interpersonal groups, individuals learn both **techniques** (skills) and **motives** (reasons) for certain kinds of behaviour. - In the jamband subculture, these characteristics determine individuals\' adherence to prosocial norms, such as sharing and trading, with more integrated members showing better understanding and adherence to these norms. - Hunt\'s analysis of the subculture revealed that frequency, intensity, and priority, but not duration, play a significant role in supporting kynd norms within the community. - The jamband subculture originated with the Grateful Dead and its fans ("Deadheads"). Musical artists considered to be "jamband" perform a blend of folk, rock, and blues and are known for improvisational jamming in their performances; this makes each individual performance completely unique - These prosocial behaviours are labelled "kynd" (p. 521), while threatening someone or talking down to them is labelled "unkynd." - This theory has shaped subsequent understandings of deviance and laid the foundation for exploring neutralization theory, which further expands on the concepts introduced by Sutherland in explaining deviant behavior. **Differential Association Theory by Edwin Sutherland : Learning from friends and Family** - Same learning process for both deviance and conformity - Deviance is learned through small, intimate groups - [Techniques] (i.e., how to) and [motives] (i.e., why) are part of the learning process - Children , especially boys, are more likely to be criminals when their father is a criminal (x2 more likely) - Way of life INSERT LINK: talks about differential association -- learning video (marshmallow thing later) **Differential Association Theory (Contd.)** - Interactions are influenced by: - **Frequency** - How often do you associate with these people - **Duration** - How long did that last, years? More time more likely to be influenced - **Priority** - How early: younger is more likely to be influenced by the group - Early influence? - **Intensity** - How important is this group to you? **Neutralization Theory: Rationalizing Deviance** - Neutralization theory, like differential association theory, suggests that deviance arises from group interactions. - It focuses on learned motives, specifically **techniques of neutralization** that allow for deviant behavior. - Part of what deviant people learn are the rationalizations for the behaviour they engage in; by rationalizing their behaviour, they can convince themselves that what they are doing is not wrong. - **denial of responsibility:** direct blame elsewhere (people stations or environments) - **denial of injury:** what they did doesn\'t hurt/harm anyone - denial of victim: perception of victim is deserving of deviant behaviour - **condemnation of condemners**: shifts focus from own deviant behaviours to deviant behaviours of others - **appealing to higher loyalties:** serving a higher purpose - Techniques of neutralization have been observed in various contexts, such as the Christian Domestic Discipline community and retail bank employees engaging in occupational deviance. - In Christian Domestic Discipline, members justify physical punishment as serving a higher purpose and deny harm to victims. - Bank employees use techniques like denying responsibility and victim blaming to justify their actions. - Everyone else is doing it - Research on honor crimes, serial killers, sexting youth, and university students with poor eating habits also shows the use of neutralization techniques to rationalize deviant behavior. - In conclusion, neutralization theory highlights how individuals rationalize and justify their deviant actions through learned techniques. **Social Learning Theory: Rewards, punishments, imitation** - Definitions - Differential association - Differential reinforcement - Imitations - Problem with this theory: - Ex/ homosexuality/heterosexuality: by definition, if were told if its deviant; is a function of how the people around you make sense of it: whether its normal or not is also defined by those around you - Function of the association was does your friends or family say - Differential reinforcement: what is the punishment or reward: affects our attitude towards a specific act: when you see certain acts are punished, you avoid, or rewarded you are more likely to do, good or bad - Social learning theory explains all behaviors through - **Definitions** - **differential association,** - **imitation, and** - **differential reinforcement.** - Related to the behaviourist theory of instrumental conditioning: Behaviors are influenced by past rewards and punishments, as well as by observing others being rewarded or punished. - We are more likely to engage in behaviours we have been rewarded for - Deviance emerges from associations and imitation, and can continue through reinforcement and definitions. - Rewards and punishments play a significant role in shaping behavior in various settings, such as parenting and school - The theory includes structural factors that create different learning contexts for individuals - Research shows the significance of social learning variables in predicting deviant behaviors, with some variation across specific forms of deviance. - Cooper and Klein\'s study on campus deviance among university students found that differential association and reinforcement were the most significant predictors of overall deviance. - Structural dimensions, such as differential social location and location in the social structure, also play a role in deviant behavior. - Imitation was significant for specific forms of deviance, such as illegal on-campus parking and alcohol use where prohibited. **Social Learning Theory (Contd)** - Social learning theory is used to study many phenomena - Adolescent alcohol use - Drinking age is different in different provinces: eery year frequency of drinking increases - What is the environment like? - Police corruption - If everyone else is corrupt it wouldn\'t be safe to be the good one , you either quit or join the corruption - Corruption will continue: its endemic -- they will become corrupt - Organization of culture: influences you - Campus deviance by university students (e.g., illegal on campus parking, plagiarism) - Ai can be a useful tool but cant do all - Cyberbullying - Other social learning theories include Sykes and Matza's [neutralization theory ] - [Read more about this ] **Limitations of Learning Theories** - Differential association theory - Methodological critiques - You can grow up in a good environment and still get involved in deviant activities - The argument destroys the idea of cognition: the ability to think -- you differentiate good or bad: you can actually abstain from doing bad things - Critique of "[escape clauses]" - People who join bad groups isn't always true - Why do people move: from normative do deviant - Theoretical and empirical responses to some of these critiques are presented in the textbook - Social learning theory, along with neutralization theory and differential association theory, highlights the importance of learning processes in understanding why individuals engage in deviant behavior. - Despite differences in explaining the learning process leading to deviance, all three theories emphasize learning as the key factor in explaining deviant behavior. - However, these theories have faced criticism, particularly regarding methodological challenges such as tallying deviant associations in an individual\'s life. - Additionally, critics argue that the theories are difficult to apply or test due to numerous qualifications. - Factors such as priority, intensity, frequency, and duration influence deviant or conforming outcomes, but determining which factor is most significant, such as early childhood parenting versus emotional attachment to deviant peers, is challenging. - Critics also point out limitations in neutralization theory, including the lack of exploration of how techniques of neutralization vary across different types of deviant behaviors or normative contexts. - Research has sought to address these critiques, such as a study comparing neutralization techniques among individuals purchasing fireworks in areas where they were legal versus banned, revealing differences in attitudes towards the harm caused by fireworks. - Neutralization theory has faced criticism for its logic and methods, as research primarily examines techniques after an act, rather than before. - This limitation suggests that such techniques might only serve as post-act justifications, not causes. - Recent studies have sought to overcome this issue, like analyzing Christian Domestic Discipline (CDD) occurrences -- testimonials and websites- importance of CDD in the first place. - Control theories, another popular explanation for deviance, offer a different perspective based on an objective view of deviance\'s nature. **Control Theories: What restraints most of us from deviance?** - Core assumptions: - Deviance is inherently attractive yet most of us do not engage in deviance - Focus on what causes [conformity] rather than what causes [deviance ] - The absence of those forces leads to deviance - Weak ties to society are likely to deviate, - - Isn\'t about why people deviate, but instead why most of us don\'t: makes this theory interesting - Control theories, also known as social control theories, differ from the social control discussed in Chapter 1. - In that chapter, social control was described as part of the social typing process, where individuals are labeled, evaluated, and subjected to social control measures. - In contrast, control theories are a type of positivist theorizing that focuses on why not all people become deviant. - These theories suggest that deviant behavior is attractive and appealing, and it is only through certain forms of restraint that individuals do not engage in deviant behavior. - Control theorists look at deviance from a unique perspective, exploring the reasons for avoiding deviant behavior rather than why some individuals engage in it. **Social Bonds Theory: Social bonds restrain us** - Hirschi - The level of acceptance with these three depends on these social bonds - **Attachment**: affective relationship -- relationship with emotions; family, partner, children -- significant people - You don't deviate because you think of these people and what they will think of your actions - You don't want to be away from them: if you get caught for something, you will not want to go to jail - **Commitment** - Commitment to conformity - Conventional careers: how committed are you to these values or goals; the more committed you are to these things (education, job, future, success, etc.) the less time you have for deviant behaviour - **Involvement** - In conventional activities - "Idle hands are the devils workshop" - Busy with work/volunteer work/familty etc., to busy for deviance, busy with conventional activities - **Belief** - Do you believe in Canadian norms, i.e. its not okay to steal - Religious groups - The more you believe the less likely you\'ll deviate - Ex/ steroid use -- a belief that its not bad, - Hirschi\'s social bonds theory explains that emotional attachments, commitment to conventional activities, involvement in activities, and belief in norms restrain individuals from deviance. - These bonds influence behavior and are crucial in preventing criminality. - Social bonds theory has been applied to various behaviors, such as driving while impaired and attitudes toward the police. - Life trajectories can shape social bonds, impacting the likelihood of deviant behavior. - Research shows that social bonds are linked to lower criminality rates, with factors like religious participation and attachment to parents playing a significant role. - However, the impact of social bonds may vary across social groups, as seen in a study of substance use among heterosexual and non-heterosexual individuals. - This highlights the need to combine social bonds theory with other theories to understand deviance in different social contexts. **Self control Theory: We restrain ourselves** - AKA general theory of crime - Henchey guy combined with some other people - Self control restrains us - We all have different levels of self control, sometimes were provoked, what determines self control is level of socialization: parents could teach you , some parents could be stern or give in easily - Children are needy and innocent: can develop self control by saying no : impossible to get everything you want - Determined by parenting in early life - Once you get a certain age - Remains relatively stable throughout life - e.g., risky driving behaviours, risky sexual behaviours, sexual behaviours, thrill seeking behaviours, criminality - VIDEO : marshmallow measure -- will be a potential exam question? - 1/3 hold off - If you have self control you can pay attention to teacher - Significant differences between toddlers who could refrain from the marshmallow - Self control can be taught - Hot and cold system: to slow hot system you have to activate cold - Hot goes up when stress goes up - Temper: - Just cause kids eats the marshmallow doesn\'t mean their hopeless - Good behaviour good consequences - Low income students: kipp school - Initially focusing on social bonds and deviance, **Hirschi later collaborated with Gottfredson** on the **general theory of crim**e, emphasizing self-control as the key factor in predisposition to deviant acts. - Low **self-contro**l includes impulsivity, risk-seeking behavior, and self-centeredness, attributed to ineffective parenting. - While influenced by various factors, self-control tends to remain stable throughout life, influencing deviant behaviors in individuals from childhood to adulthood. - Empirical research strongly supports this theory, linking low self-control to various criminal and non-criminal activities such as violent crimes, risky driving, and cybercrime victimization. - Studies in different cultural contexts, including Iran and Argentina, reinforce the association between low self-control and deviant behavior, demonstrating the theory\'s applicability worldwide. - Overall, self-control theory provides significant insights into understanding and predicting deviant behaviors across diverse populations. **Limitations of Control Theories** - Definition of self-control is tautological - To simple, lack of self control is lack of self control: explains the same thing, explaining the theory of self control or control with definitions of control or self control - Makes explanation weak , vague, simple. Logical but not good enough - It is somewhat teleological - We are talking about lack of bonds to society, we are only talking about the purpose, if people fail to obey and you call that deviant and problematic why would you follow the rules in the first place, made to believe we must obey, we are seen as breaking the rules if we are not obedient, therefore the purpose of social intuitions , there\'s is none - Lack of following rules = deviant, we didn't make the rule, we don't follow the rules all the time so we shouldn\'t have to follow that rule? - Purpose: lack of purpose: doesn\'t explain the why - Peer associations are ignored - Doesn\'t talk about how friends can influence our behaviour - Friends / family you act differently around friends than you do family - Unable to explain the pursuit of anti-social deviance versus seeking behaviours - Why someone deviates seriously (murder) vs when someone deviates for the thrill - Requires theoretical integration - By combining control theory with differential association - Fails to look at various situations different people can be in, some people need to work so they miss class - Theoretical and empirical responses to some of these critiques are presented in the textbook - Control theories provide a unique perspective on deviance. - Self-control theory, however, has faced criticism for its definition and measurement of self-control. - It has been described as tautological, as low self-control is often defined based on deviant behaviors. - Some researchers have shifted towards measuring self-control as a personality trait through psychological inventories. - Despite criticisms, integrating control theories with other theories, such as social learning theory, has proven to be successful in explaining deviant behavior. - Various **positivist theories** of deviance aim to explain the causes of deviant behavior. - **Functionalist theories** focus on societal structures, while learning theories emphasize the role of learning processes in deviance. - Control theories, like social bonds theory, highlight the importance of social bonds in preventing deviance. - **Self-control theory** examines the impact of parenting on self-control development. Integrating these theories can enhance our understanding of deviant behavior. - Empirical studies have shown this tautology in measuring self-control through deviant acts, which are then used to explain other deviant behaviors. - To address these issues, some researchers have measured self-control as a personality trait using psychological inventories. - Despite criticisms, integrating control theories with other theories, such as social learning theory, has proven successful in explaining deviant behavior. - Functionalist, learning, and control theories all aim to explain the causes of deviance, with a focus on societal structures, learning processes, and social bonds, respectively. - These positivist theories have dominated academic understandings of deviance, but subjective views have led to the development of interpretive and critical approaches, which will be explored further in Chapter 3. **Key Points** - Positivist approaches focus on deviance causation - Functionalist theories attribute the causes of deviance to characteristics of the social structure - Learning theories attribute the causes of deviance to processes of learning - Control theories attribute the causes of conformity to forms of restraint. **Explaining Deviance II Interpretive and Critical Theories Chapter 3: Explaning Deviance: the perception, reaction and power** **Discussion outline** - Non positivist theorizing: Introduction - Interpretive theories: Understandings of Deviance and Normality - Critical Theories, Power relations and social justice **Non-Positivist Theorizing** - Not wrong, just limitations and the newer approaches accommodate limitations - Some sources attribute the statement to philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche: \"All things are subject to interpretation. Whichever interpretation prevails at a given time is a function of power and not truth.\" This suggests that moral codes are shaped by interpretations intertwined with power structures, rather than absolute morality. - This marks a shift from positivist theories like functionalist, learning, and control theories, which focus on explaining deviant behavior causes. - Subjective views argue that deviance is socially constructed and perception-dependent, influenced by power dynamics. - Interpretive and critical theories, emphasizing reciprocal understanding and social justice, are better at explaining the social construction of deviance. - These theories focus on power relations behind social rules, addressing how people perceive the world, others, and themselves through interactions. - The chapter reviews various interpretive and critical theories used to explain deviance\'s social construction. - 'These approaches are valuable for understanding the creation of social norms and deviant behavior, aligning with the interests of subjective-oriented deviance specialists. - Overall, interpretive and critical approaches play a crucial role in explaining the complexity of deviance in society. **Interpretive Theories: Understandings of Deviance and Normality** - Our perceptions of and reactions to deviance - People react to deviance differently - Ex/prostitution/ illegal in Canada; soliciting -- but people still do it; people perceive sex work differently - Interpretive theories emphasize: - Social interaction - Meanings understandings and interpretations - Varied understandings of deviance and normality **Symbolic Interactionist Theory: Communication Creates understanding** - We communicate with others using symbols - e.g. Barton (2015) argued that self-identified lesbian women and gay men rely on cues to identify similar others - Physical cues \--\> hair clothing, posture - Conversational cues \--\> vocal inflection, avoidance of gender pronouns - Interactional cues \--\> "double look" "gaydar gaze" - These processes result in varied interpretations of self and others - Through the process of the looking glass self out own identities are based on what we believe other people think of us - Role taking/role playing: doctor/patient, mother/baby: pretending to be something else of a different status - - According to symbolic interactionism, society is a process created through communication with others using symbols. - Symbolic communication includes verbal and nonverbal cues, such as clothing, gestures, and conversations, to convey messages and create meaning. - Research shows how individuals use symbolic cues to identify similar others, expanding social networks and avoiding deviantization. - A study on perceptions of violence found varied understandings based on individual interactions and experiences. - Judge Creighton\'s perspective on language and crime highlights how words shape treatment within the criminal justice system. - Processes like **role taking** and the **looking-glass self** influence how we develop meaning and understanding by considering others\' perspectives and perceptions. **Significant others** and the generalized other play a role in shaping our self-concept and actions based on how we think others perceive us. - The generalized other refers to other people, any other people in public - Symbolic interactionism emphasizes society as a communication process using symbols to create meaning. - Verbal and nonverbal cues convey messages and help individuals identify similar others. Research shows how symbolic cues expand social networks and shape perceptions of violence. - Judge Creighton\'s view on language and crime highlights its impact on the criminal justice system. - "'We don't have a word for crime \[in the Blackfoot language\]\.... Our word is mistake.'" As presiding judge of the new Calgary Indigenous Court, Judge Creighton applies First Nations' traditions "through peacemaking and connecting accused people to their cultures and communities." The word crime seems inextricably linked with the notion of punishment, while the word mistake implies acknowledging the wrongdoing and trying to repair any damage that has been done. - Role taking and the looking-glass self-influence meaning through others\' perspectives. - Significant others and the generalized other shape our self-concept and actions based on perceived perceptions. - Symbolic communication helps navigate social interactions and understand our place in society. **Labelling Theory: Becoming an outsider** - The Labelling process - Deviant label: aggressive, rude, criminal, convict, failure etc. - Person is then treated negatively - Person with the label can then act differently: leave, find a group who is like them, or try and prove wrong: return to conventional society - If not becomes part of identiy - Symbolic interactionism provides a framework for understanding the social construction of deviance. - **Labelling theories** focus on how being [labelled] as \"deviant\" leads to changes in behavior and identity. - **Tannenbaum** (1938) and **Lemert** (1951) analyzed the impact of labelling on individuals, distinguishing between **primary** and **secondary deviance.** - Tannenbaum: role ragging plays in the **dramatization of evil** - **He suggested that as observers in society, we may initially label a particular act as "deviant" or "evil" ("tagging") but soon come to generalize that judgment to the person as a whole ("dramatization of evil")---in other words, it is no longer just the initial act that is considered evil, but rather the person is considered evil.** - Lemert uses the word labelling rather than tagging - Also distinguishes between primary and secondary - **Primary**: seldom used, not caught by others - **Secondary**: build a lifestyle around it - Suggests that the mere act of being caught changes the way others see you and therefore you see yourself - Becker (1963) further explored how the deviant label becomes a person\'s **master status: core characteristic others identify you,** affecting daily life and interactions. - Transition to secondary deviance - Soon you begin to feel like an outside, from people who don\'t engage in the deviant act or are even excluded from the conforming world - The acceptance in the deviant world is what he suggests leads to a lifestyle build around deviance and what Lemert called secondary deviance - Goffman (1963) identified different types of stigma(**stigmatization**), including physical, moral, group, and courtesy stigma. - We can also face stigmatization for the actions of others---known as **courtesy stigma or stigma by association** (Goffman, 1963). - He also introduced the concept of **dramaturgy**, comparing social life to a theatrical performance where individuals play roles to manage impressions. - Front stage: the way we are in front of certain groups of people - When we leave that audience, we retreat from that role - We risk having a spoiled identity: we must manage how our audience perceives us - This involves **identity management**, especially in contexts where stigma is present. **Managing impressions** in the workplace, for example, can influence perceptions of commitment and professionalism. - Stigmatized characteristics add complexity to role performances, requiring individuals to navigate stigma management in addition to impression management. - Although we all perform our roles in controlled ways when on the front stage of the workplace, now imagine that you have a characteristic that is stigmatized, such that managing your impressions at work also entails stigma management - The relationship between audience, stigmatization, and identity is intricate and multifaceted. - Different groups may interpret the same act or characteristic in various ways, as shown by symbolic interactionism. - The dramaturgical approach highlights that managing stigma in front of one audience may lead to stigmatization in front of another. - Individuals use specific stigma management strategies, with some being upfront and risking discrimination, while others hide their stigma and feel shame. - Withdrawal from social interactions can result in isolation and further mental health issues. - Stigmatization can have positive consequences, such as expanding support networks and enhancing group identity. - Labelling theorists argue that resistance to being labelled as deviant can lead to social change and the redefinition of societal norms. - Examples of positive impacts include LGBTQ2IA+ activism, which has influenced laws and moral codes. - Ultimately, perceptions of deviance affect how we are treated, how we see ourselves, and how we behave in the future. **Deaf identities, performances and stigma(tectbook thing)** - People with disabilities often face stigmatization, including those who are deaf and have bicultural identities. - Cultural Deaf individuals immerse themselves in a separate subculture, while those who identify as deaf are integrated into the hearing world. - Stigmatization can occur in both settings, leading individuals to use various stigma management techniques. - They may present themselves as \"hard of hearing\" or emphasize their Deafness based on the audience. - Maintaining a positive self-image involves normalizing differences or deafness itself. - However, navigating both worlds can result in stigmatization for not being authentically Deaf enough or for using assistive technologies. - Research participants emphasized pride in their deafness and criticized extremists in the Deaf subculture. - Actions like using assistive technologies can lead to stigmatization from different audiences for different reasons. - We all perform in front of varied audiences and must carefully manage our identities to avoid stigmatization in different settings. **Labelling theory: Tannenbaum (1939)** - When you get a parking ticket: the action is tagged: not you yourself - Bad guy in movie: person is seen as evil: - Self fulfilling prophecy **Labelling Theory: Lemert** - Primary deviance: you are not committing to deviance - Label becomes identity: secondary deviance -- person has assumed label and is fulfilling prophecy **Labelling Theory: Goffman (1959)** - We may be stigmatized for a variety of reasons - Physical stigma e.g. appearance, illness - Moral stigma e.g. sex work; financial problems - Group stigma e.g. gender identity; religion - Courtesy stigma or stigma by association = stigmatized for the actions of others - E.g. Mothers of school shooters - Dramaturgical approach: differences between our front stage self and backstage self - If the role we have assumed is stigmatizedwe wnwage in stigma management on the front stage - Acts that manage stigma in front of one audience may cause sigma in other audiences - People who are part of both hearing and Deaf cultures - Note the distinction between deaf and Deaf discussed in the chapter **Labelling Theory: Becker (1963)** - Deviance is a master status - Core characteristic of a person - A person with a deviant master status becomes an outsider - Changes in identity and lifestyle **The Deviant Career: Progressing through deviance** - Progression through deviance = progression through a career - Both are interpretive experiences - Stages and career contingencies - e.g. becoming a cannabis user, exiting sex work - Howard Becker (1963) introduced the concept of the **deviant career** to study deviance as a social interaction-based interpretive experience. - Similar to a traditional career, deviance unfolds in stages in people\'s lives, involving entry, management, and potentially exit from deviance. - Becker illustrated this concept with cannabis users, identifying stages such as beginner, occasional, and regular users. (sequential model of deviance) - Factors like access to drugs, learning correct usage, and perceived pleasure from drug effects influence becoming a cannabis user. - **Career contingencies,** or significant turning points: influence direction that people take at various points in their deviant career like access to a stable drug supply, can impact the direction of one\'s deviant career. - Other specialists have applied the deviant career concept to analyze followers of anti-establishment political parties, small-scale cannabis growers, methamphetamine users, and clients of compensated dating. - Some specialists focus on different phases of the deviant career, like entry, management, or exit. - For example, Drucker and Nieri (2018) study the process of exiting sex work, finding that career contingencies like assaults or becoming a parent can influence the decision to exit. - The meaning of \"exit\" varies among different forms of sex work, with some workers transitioning to other careers while others continue with sex work. - Interactionist concepts like role taking, meaning, understanding, and communication are central to the processes involved in deviant careers. **Limitations of interpretive theories** - Failure to address the social structure - Failure to address long term effects of labelling - Theories developed through an interpretive approach focus on constructing meaning and understanding in interpersonal interactions and how this influences how people treat others and perceive themselves. - These theories shed light on aspects of deviance, such as how individuals may base their lifestyle and identity on deviance, reactions to being labeled deviant, and ways people may exit deviance. - However, criticism of interpretive theories is that they overlook the role of social structure in deviance and normality. Later theorists, like Sheldon Stryker, acknowledge the importance of social structures in shaping interactions. - Empirical research integrates structural components into interactionist analyses, showing the impact of anticipated stigma on adjustment to the community. - For example, visible minorities may develop coping strategies due to ongoing stigmatization, leading to more positive community adjustment. - Applying labelling theory to youth criminality in South Korea demonstrates how the social structure, such as the education system, influences the labelling process and impacts outcomes. - Critical theorizing about deviance explores the role of power in shaping societal perceptions of deviance. **Critical theories: Power relations and Social Justice** - Power relations - Emancipatory foundation (praxis) - A variety of critical theories exist, including Marxist, non-Marxist conflict, feminist, postmodernist, and more. - These theories analyze power structures and societal norms, with a focus on social justice and empowerment for marginalized groups. - conflict theorist Karl Marx stated that social scientists have a responsibility to use their work in pursuit of practical, emancipatory goals, which he referred to as praxis - Karl Marx emphasized the importance of using social science for practical, emancipatory goals, known as praxis. - By understanding and dismantling power structures, positive social change can occur. - This chapter explores various critical theories such as conflict, power-reflexive, feminist, and postmodern theories, highlighting the significance of addressing power dynamics for societal transformation. **Conflict Theory: Rules serve the interests of the Powerful** - This slide conveys the three assumptionns shared among a diverse conflict theory within the context of deviance - Many forms of conflict theory - e.g. instrumental Marxism, culture conflict theory etc. - In a democracy the powerful cannot only coerce the powerless but must also convince the powerless that the rules are logical - Hegemony and false consciousness - Conflict theories are diverse: the share some core assumptions: - First, they presume that social rules do not emerge out of consensus but rather out of conflict and that they serve the interests of the most influential groups in society. - Second, they suggest that members of powerful groups are less likely to break the rules because the rules were created to serve their interests in the first place. - Third, conflict theories propose that members of less powerful groups are more likely to act in ways that violate social rules, either because - \(1) their sense of oppression and alienation causes them to act out in rule-breaking ways or - \(2) social rules have defined the acts of the powerless as deviant in the first place Conflict theories, rooted in the work of Karl Marx, posit that societal rules are a product of power struggles among different groups. - These theories suggest that powerful groups create rules to serve their own interests, labeling the actions of less powerful groups as deviant. - Societies powerful (**bourgeoise**) - Societies powerless (**proletariat**) - The sense of alienation experienced by the proletariat because of their working conditions gives rise to deviant behaviour among some people. - Later Marxists fell into two general camps, **instrumental Marxists** and **structural Marxists** - **Instrumental Marxists (e.g., Quinney, 1977)** propose that institutionalized social rules, such as the law, are created by the powerful to serve the interests of the powerful---the owners of the means of production. A "deviant" label thereby becomes an instrument used to control the proletariat and maintain the existing distribution of power. - **Structural Marxists (e.g., Chambliss & Seidman, 1982)** propose that institutionalized social rules are created by the powerful to protect the capitalist economic system rather than to protect individual capitalists. The need to maintain the power of the economic system as a whole means that even members of the bourgeoisie may be subject to a "deviant" label if their behaviour threatens the fundamental principles of capitalism. - Marxist theories based on the presumptions of economic structures of inequality - Pluralist conflict theory: multiple axes of inequality - Conflict theories vary in their focus, with some emphasizing economic factors (Marxist) and others looking at multiple axes of inequality, cultural conflicts, or group power struggles. - For example, the recent passing of Bill 21 in Quebec, the Laicity act which bans public employees from wearing religious symbols, illustrates culture conflict theory in action. - violation of people's right to freedom of religious belief and expression. - Illustration of culture conflict theory - **Group conflict theory** suggests that various groups in society are in constant competition for power, leading to clashes and the emergence of crime and deviance. - George Vold (1958) extended conflict assumptions beyond cultural groups to a wide range of other groups as well. He suggested that multiple groups are always manoeuvring for more power in society and clash with each other as a result of their simultaneous struggles for power. - In situations of conflict, crime and deviance emerge because people will commit acts they do not normally engage in (e.g., vandalism, assault) in pursuit of their higher goal---trying to attain more power for their social groups - Those in positions of authority use social control to maintain their power and influence by labeling the actions of competing groups as deviant. - Ultimately, conflict theories of deviance emphasize the role of power dynamics in shaping societal norms and identifying behaviors as deviant in order to maintain existing power structures. - Austin Turk (1969) stated that the core struggle in society is more broadly between those who are in positions of authority and those who are subject to authority. - Those who are in authority try to maintain their authority by convincing society's less powerful groups of the validity of the existing social rules, using as much coercion as necessary if the less powerful groups refuse to be "convinced." Socially typing the norms or actions of conflicting groups as deviant is one way that positions of authority can be maintained. - Non-dominant social groups can be deviantized as a whole rather than just their interests and perceptions, particularly in areas like policing where marginalized groups are deemed as \"police property.\" - This perception leads to acts of racial profiling, as seen in a study of high school students in Toronto showing Black youth being targeted by police even when controlling for other factors. - A public inquiry into racial profiling by the Toronto Police Service revealed a concerning pattern of police violence against Black individuals. - Powerful groups maintain their power by convincing the populace that they serve everyone\'s interests, using ideology and hegemony to control society\'s institutions. - The concept of false consciousness leads people to accept the dominant worldview as rational, limiting the possibility of alternative perspectives. - Conflict theorists suggest that change is necessary to address power imbalances and create social justice, with the goal of enlightening society about the hidden interests at play in institutionalized knowledge. - Awareness of ideology, **false consciousness(**the Frankfurt School, explained that society's masses develop a false consciousness)and **hegemony** (i.e., becoming the dominant way of seeing and understanding the world is crucial for dismantling hierarchical power structures and achieving a fairer society. - Because the powerful control society's institutions, such as schools and the media, their ideology is taught to citizens as "common sense" **Power Reflexive theory: Knowledge is power** - Claims to knowledge that emerge from locations of power become legitimized - In a [panoptical] society not only do we surveil others we also we engage in self-surveillance - e.g. public restrooms - Power-reflexive theories, sometimes known as poststructuralist theories, focus on the interconnectedness of knowledge and power. - These theories argue that all claims to knowledge are influenced by power dynamics, with certain discourses being privileged and institutionalized as \"truth\" based on power relations. - For instance, historical examples show how the authority of the Christian church in the Middle Ages was eventually surpassed by scientific claims during the Enlightenment. - Foucault emphasizes the importance of analyzing how power shapes knowledge claims, as seen in the genealogy of speech language pathology (SLP) which emerged to meet the demands of industrial capitalism. - Efficient productive speech - Medical science played a key role in pathologizing speech differences and determining standards of normalcy. - Foucault also discusses the **Panopticon**, a prison design by Jeremy Bentham, where constant surveillance led prisoners to self-regulate their behavior, highlighting the role of power in social control. - Didn\'t know they were being observed - Potential for constant surveillance led them to regulate their own behaviour - Overall, power-reflexive theories underscore the influence of power on knowledge production and social control. They suggest that understanding power dynamics is essential for analyzing and critiquing dominant discourses and institutions, such as medical science in determining social norms. - Foucault\'s work on the Panopticon further illustrates how surveillance and power intersect to regulate behavior in society. - Foucault theorized that industrialization and bureaucratization have led to a panoptical society, where mechanisms of social control ensure \"normal\" behavior and prevent \"deviant\" behavior. - Government surveillance, post-9/11, is accepted under the guise of safety. - In modern society, individuals internalize social control, engaging in self-surveillance to regulate their own behavior. - This internalization, termed \"imprinting the panoptic eye,\" makes control more effective. - For instance, the distinction between \"responsible gambling\" (beneficial) and \"problem gambling\" (harmful) emphasizes self-monitoring and self-regulation to prevent or address issues. - Power, knowledge, and social control intersect in everyday life, like in school restrooms designed for student surveillance. - Foucault highlighted the design\'s control aspect, allowing authorities to monitor students discreetly. - Overall, Foucault\'s concept of a panoptical society reveals how pervasive social control leads individuals to govern themselves, emphasizing self-regulation and internalized surveillance to adhere to societal norms. - Public restrooms are still places of surveillance regarding sex and gender with most designated for males or females. - Cisgender individuals easily choose the appropriate restroom based on societal norms, monitoring their behaviors and others\'. - Gender non-conforming individuals have a more complex restroom choice as eithe

Document Details

Tags

Related

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue