Take a minute and make a list of your responses to these questions. Then place your list in the discussion topic Who is deviant or What is deviance? This should be an open response, whatever comes to mind. I will post follow-ups to your postings so that we can share our thoughts and connect what we have identified here with the points made in these notes.
Look at the lists you generated with your answers to the question of 'What?' and 'Who?' Ask yourselves what all of these have in common? Who defines the deviant? What are the circumstances that make an act deviant? According to who? What group?
for some groups an act is not deviant -- if I use marijuana, that is not deviant in the jazz playing groups to which I might belong, if I drink and am drunk most of the time, that is not deviant among transients and fellow alcoholics.
what is defined as deviant is done by those with the power to make the definitions stick. The 'establishment,' law makers, opinion leaders, heads of departments, leaders in groups and so forth.
each of us has committed acts that are deviant to some group some where, but we are not necessarily defined as deviant.
e.g., if I show up at work once a year or only once drunk, chances are no one will call that deviant, but if I show up in that condition every day, then it is deviant
e.g., if I wear jeans to class all of the time, that will not be enough to label me serious deviant, eccentric perhaps, but not deviant.
however, if I persist in propositioning students in the class for favors of various kinds, that rule is considered important and I am likely to be labeled as deviant for this activity. It is also likely to cost me my position at the University!!
relates to the rule above. The deviance is considered serious if the rule being violated is important. Important rules are those often that govern acts and activities that are seen as threatening to the group. Keep in mind that this kind of thing is relative (what is considered as serious and threatening to the group depends entirely on the group in question and the activity discussed).
In earlier periods, the ideas of people like Galileo and Copernicus were seen as threatening the integrity of the church and its beliefs. Both of these men were identified as deviants and excommunicated from the church for that reason.
Think of examples where acts that arouse a great response, but you do not see them as being that serious. Then consider the response from the group and how that response relates to the integrity of the group. Often you will find something very important to the group being threatened.
Abortion, for example, threatens the sanctity of life for some groups, for others it threatens the integrity of the family by permitting women to engage in sexual activity outside the bounds of matrimony. Since life and the family are seen as very, very important by these groups, abortion is seen as a threat to the groups, and therefore must be abolished so the sanctity of the groups may be maintained.
Two things are of importance here. First this is an early attempt to explain criminal behavior through physical characteristics. I would think that Lombroso was motivated by a sincere desire to be able to identify criminal behavior and once identified to eliminate it. Second, the manner in which this was shown to be incorrect. This is very important since we draw conclusions of the kind made by Lombroso even today (that is we assume that because two things occur together in one kind of group, they must therefore be linked). We usually discover that the characteristics has a frequency of occurrence in the population at large that is quite similar in our suspect population, thereby negating the presumed association.
e.g., XYY chromosomal difference -- again see the text
personal space and violent behavior:
A. personal space is the area around us that we consider to be an extension of our body or selves. The size of this bubble is culturally defined. Americans and Northern Europeans like a distance of about 18'' to 2', Mediterranean and Arabic peoples tolerate a much small space, often on the order of 15'' or less. They like to be able to feel the breath and to smell the other person. Hall has noted interaction that he called the 'diplomatic dance.' It occurs when a Northerner interacts with a Southerner (as defined above). The Arab or Mediterranean likes to be close, he moves in; the northern European is uncomfortable, he moves back; the southerner moves in, the northerner moves back. In this fashion they 'dance' around the room as they converse with one another.
B. there is some suggestion that the size of the personal bubble each of us carries with us is related to violent behavior, researchers have noted that violent prisoners often have a need for a larger personal bubble that most of us, they react violently when that bubble is unexpectedly violated. The violent behavior in this case is attributed to the size of personal space, an individual social psychological characteristic
is seen to be partially, perhaps entirely genetically based.
relates to weak self esteem, inability to control temper, rage Another relates to too much self control, holds in, then explodes
These cannot explain all of the deviance, there is much that is unrelated to either the supposed biological or individual qualities. This type of deviance tends to be impulsive, our interest is in the repeated acts of deviance -- e.g., gang behavior, criminal behavior, patterns of dress, initial use of drugs.
Differential association defines the cause of deviant or delinquent behavior in the pattern of associations that we have. We are deviant or delinquent because we associate with people who are deviant or delinquent. Your parents (or you as a parent) are aware of this potential whenever you make a point of the kinds of children your children play with or go out with.
Note that much of our prison system is based in part on this set of ideas, that one learns from association with criminals.
The key point is that the young person becomes deviant through association with others, learning from them. Some research suggests that kids become involved in deviant acts because others reject them, not that they associate with delinquents. And as Stark points out, this view cannot explain how deviant groups come into existence in the first place.
The deviant groups exist within the community, youth are attracted to them. Again as Stark points this is not a full deviance theory since does not address how such subcultures come into existence in the first place. It is useful in general discussion of delinquency and deviance when people are drawn into such groups or 'subcultures.'
This comes close to helping to explain how deviance comes about, but suffers from the same flaw of the above, it does not address the issue of how the groups to which become attached come into existence in the first place. Gangs come to have a prominent place in this discussion as they are often seen as meeting needs that some young people have and are not being met in the home. The gang forms to provide this kind of support, identity and attachment. Once formed, the bonds can be quite strong.
concern here is not with what causes deviance, but more with why aren't we deviant. This is discussed in greater detail below.
Labeling occurs in response to the commission of deviant acts and is influential in how those acts and the actors are seen by others. Labeling occurs in a series of steps, outlined below
a. the first time we commit a deviant act, that is primary deviance
b. if we are identified with the deviant act, then others may come to expect us to commit further acts of this kind (even if we did not do so in the first place).
c. when we do respond to this expectation with a deviant act, the act we commit is called secondary deviance. That is the act is a response to be called a deviant, even if we were not to that point
d. for example, suppose that a boy or a girl samples a drug. The parents, school authorities find out and are constantly watching the kid. The kid does not want to use drugs again, but everyone seems to believe that they are, no one believes they are clean. Finally the kid says to hell with it, if they think I am then I may as well go ahead and do it. THIS IS SECONDARY DEVIANCE.
e. labeling is the process of labeling someone as deviant, criminal, or what ever, the acts that follow from this are secondary deviant. Note that this is a social process involving both the deviant and the group or persons doing the labeling
Rather than ask why people are deviant we turn the question around and ask why do people conform? As we look about us we find that most people conform to the rules most of the time. Few of us are 'deviant' or criminal. If we did not conform there would have to be a policeman to watch each and every one of us, everyone would be a policeman watching everyone else. In such circumstances, there is a very low level of trust and the sense of community disappears. There are better ways of maintaining order and conformity. Efficient control is maintained when each of us is our own policeman. There are a number of social factors that contribute to this conformity and social control. Most notable among these are the internal controls of conscience and our attachments to groups. Direct and indirect external controls also exist.
1. conscience -- your own internal policeman. Each of us has been carefully taught by our parents and by others to understand and to obey the rules. We have been instilled with a conscience that makes us feel guilty whenever we violate the rules. For example, I grew up in a rural area and was taught that it was wasteful to drop picked fruit and vegetables. I still wince whenever a piece of fruit gets away from me and drops to the ground or into the mud. This is a form of conscience. It is this internal 'policeman' that keeps us from driving through a red light very early in the morning when there is not traffic anywhere to be seen. Notice that this kind of control is very, very efficient, it is always with us and means that we always conform to the norms, rules and expectations of our community.
2. attachments -- the 'baggage' we pick up, e.g., jobs, wives, kids, friends and so. These attachments provide us with a lot to lose. These are a variation on the attachments discussed above (those often related to the links that provide us with emotional support and worth). The 'attachments' in this sense are more the accumulated wealth and position we have in the community. One way to assess the kind of attachment is to look at a small businessman, who provides a service to the community in contrast to a similar individual who earns his living from a large corporation. The businessman has many, many links and connections to the community that are necessary for his survival and continued well being. The corporate employee has no links to the local community (other than friends and perhaps family). The result is that the employee may not worry about cheating people in the community or actually stealing from them. He could move easily within the corporation and be gone. In this same thread note that as we grow older we collect things that link us to the community and that make it more difficult to cheat, lie and steal in the community because we have so much more to lose. The young person who is just starting out has little in the way of things or reputation to risk, so can try many different kinds of things, including those that are illegal or deviant.
3. note that most deviance occurs among those in their late teens and twenties, people with few attachments. In the effort to keep young people in school, the emphasis is on extracurricular activities, where you develop attachments to people in the activities and to the school. The more of these activities, and the more the attachments, the less likely the student is to drop out.
these are the forces that can be brought to bear upon us. The state, as we shall see later on, monopolizes the legitimate use of force to control the population. Such force works so long as it is seen as being legitimate and not excessive. However, as soon as groups begin to see the application of force as illegal or excessive, then the effectiveness of these controls is greatly lessened and armed conflict will break out. Several examples of the use of excessive or perceived illegal force come to mind. In the early days of the Civil Rights Movement, the application of force in the south against marchers was seen as being both excessive and illegal. The result is that the southern states lost a great deal of sympathy and legitimacy in the eyes of many. The video tape of the beating of Rodney King is seen as an example of the excessive use of force, contributing to the view that the police of Los Angeles are not 'legitimate.' The attack by Federal agents on the homestead on Ruby Ridge in Idaho is seen as another example of excessive and illegitimate use of force. The same can be said for the incident at Waco, Texas against the Branch Davidians.
rewards and punishments associated with work. People are often held under control by the threat of the loss of a job or loss of pay in that job. These become very powerful deterrents to those who might otherwise consider challenging authority. Consider your own position in the university as a student. If you want a degree, you must play by the rules, whether you like them or not.
These indirect, external controls become increasingly effective as we mature and gain more position within the society. Such controls often rest upon our fear of loss of income, position, or other material objects that we have accumulated.
I have given you plenty of dull stuff about the theories used to explain deviance and crime. Now lets take some time and look at the actual data. For this purpose I am linking you with a variety of data sources on the Web. Explore some of these sites and the information that is on the pages.
The first place we will start is with the Statistical Abstract of the United States. The section on crime and prisons will require that your computer have the Adobe Acrobat reader installed. Take some time to page through this set of data.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is another source for information on criminal activities. Keep in mind that the crime statistics are those that are reported by the local police agencies to the Bureau.
Another source of information is the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency. This agency conducts annual surveys and reports the results on their data web site.
Deviance is seen to be relative, that is what is considered to be deviant or criminal behavior depends upon what groups are in power and what they consider to be deviant. Furthermore, there are differences among groups as to what is considered to be deviant behavior. Jazz musicians have rarely considered the use of marijuana deviant, businesses almost always consider such use deviant. There are many explanations for deviant behavior, some based in the individual and her/his psychology. Most explanations place the source of deviant behavior in the realm of the social, in the structure of the society. These same explanations also note that most of us do not deviate seriously, but rather conform most of the time. Conformity is attributed to social control, both formal and informal and direct and indirect.
| Unit 3: Biology, Culture and Society | Unit 4: Socialization and Social Roles | Unit 5: Deviance, Conformity and Social Control | Unit 6 (Next topic) |
| Topical Outline of Course | |||
Copyright © 1996, 1997,1998, 1999,2000 by Richard H. Anderson, the Department of Sociology and the University of Colorado at Denver.
This page last revised: January 13, 2000. Please contact Richard H. Anderson (randerso@carbon.cudenver.edu) if you experience any problems or have comments about these pages.