sociology: deviance and social control

deviance

the “percieved” violation of norms, everyday violations of expected behaviours which can sometimes be criminal, umbrella term for norm violation

absolutist perspective on deviance

deviance comes from god or laws of nature

criminology

the study of crime in society, acts society view as deviant usually become criminalized, theres a behaviour → its a problem → laws are created to surround it

status offence

a specific law that prohibits people from doing things within certain social groups (minors, women, men)

norms

formal and informal rules of conduct for membership in a group, they are the expectations of conduct in particular situations and they regulate human social relations and behaviour

folkway

informal rules for acceptable behaviour within a group, not strictly enforced, they can still be very powerful

mores

formal rules of conduct within a group, these are taken much more seriously and are seen as essential to our core values, we insist on conformity to mores, they are usually codified

taboos

a norm so strongly engrained that even the thought of its violation brings us to convulsion

conformity

most people conform since it is difficult to live in our society without conforming to expected normative behaviour, you could be deviant in one way but have a subculture that agrees with you in order to have some semblance of conformity

informal social control

sanctions applied to individuals who violate folkways, typically those we personally know, they can mean less coming from people you dont know, power dynamics can play an important role

agents of informal control

anyone in society

formal social control

sanctions applied to individuals violating mores or taboos, involves organized reactions from the state or other institutions

agents of formal social control

police, military, state, teachers. social workers, doctors

deviance typology

deviance can be defined as negative or positive based on evaluations and can also either under/nonconform or overconform

motivations for studying deviance

1. vicarious experience: wanna live through the lives who are deviant but dont want to actually be deviant

2. reform: want social change and protect others

3. self protection

4. understanding oneself and others

5. intellectual curiosity

academic views of deviance prior to 1960s

focused on “outsiders”, they were seen as abnormal and born to be deviant, something in their genes was just wrong

academic views of deviance after the 1960s

realization that its possible for anyone of any social class to commit deviant behaviour and not just poorer communities

subculture

any system of beliefs, values, and norms that are shared by a minority of people within a particular culture, minority culture that differs in some way from a larger culture but doesnt have to oppose conventional society

counterculture

culture that directly opposes another culture, feels pressure and power from dominant society and exists to oppose it, questions about if counterculture is dead because things have become more mainstream like weed

objective definitions of deviance

this perspective holds that some things are inherently moral and immoral, we know when deviance is occurring because it is causing harm

main positions on objective definitions of deviance

1. believe there is a quality inherent in a person, behaviour, or characteristic that is necessarily deviant

2. define deviance based on the concept of harm

3. deviance is defined based on how societys masses respond to certain people, behaviours, or characteristics

4. deviance is based on normative violation, which refers to people, behaviours, or characteristics that violate societys norms

consensual view of norms

views the law as arising out of social consensus and then equally applied to all

conflict view of norms

claims the law is a tool used by the ruling class to serve its own interest

interactionist view of norms

suggests that societys powerful define the law in response to interest groups that approach them to rectify a percieved social problem

objective attempts to define deviance

• statistical rarity

• harmfulness

• normative violation: “ill know it when i see it”, norms and values of a group can identify what is deviant and what is not when they see it

• social reaction

subjective positions on deviance

believe morality is relative and based on peoples perceptions, believe there is not a quality that lies at the core of deviance but rather a process, focuses on deviance as a social construction

• process lies in the dominant moral codes that serve as foundation for determining who or what is deviant in society

social constructionism

refers to the perspective proposing that social characteristics are creations or artifacts of a certain society at a specific time in history, just as objects are artifacts of that society

strict constructionism

claims the world is characterized by endless relativism, and that there is no essential reality in the social world outside of peoples experience of it

contextual constructionism

emphasizes 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 signifigance 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

3. the meanings attached to that behaviour or characteristic

individual level of deviance construction

our identities, conceptions of self and ways of understanding our own existence in the world affect the path of social construction

interactional level of deviance construction

our interactions with other people influence the way we think and feel about others, thereby determining the role that each of us plays in social construction

institutional level of deviance construction

the structures of our society, such as government, the education system, and religion affect social construction

sociocultural level of deviance construction

beliefs, ideologies, values, and systems of meaning have an influence on the path of social construction

globalization in deviance construction

refers to processes that create “tight global economic, political, cultural, and environmental interconnections that flows that make most current borders and boundaries irrelevant”

relativist perspective on deviance

there is nothing inherent in a behaviour or, characteristic that makes it deviant, reality is created by human interaction, focuses on the process of naming certain behaviours and/or characteristics as deviant

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? 

• the participants in this “dance” each take certain “steps” to move the dance in the direction they desire, whether that direction is creating a new law, legalizing a behaviour that was previously illegal, achieving public recognition of a new social problem or one previously ignored, or changing public perceptions that will reduce the stigma faced by certain groups

moral entrepreneurs, becker 1963

those who manufacture public morality, rules are invoked when someone with influence feels they are needed, not every time someone breaks them, this process therefore focuses just as much on the definers of deviance as the deviants themselves

universal definition of deviance

1. presumed behaviour that

2. defies social expectations that

3. are made and enforced by people with influence and

4. have been applied to particular people or groups in particular situations

functionalism

focuses on anomie and strain leading people to commit deviant behaviours

• idea that well functioning societies have core consensus of values and social change may create social disorganization sometimes leading to deviance

durkheim

argued crime was normal and universal, by violating deviant boundaries criminals help create social cohesion, when norms are violated community becomes outraged which brings community together

general strain theory

failure to achieve goals, removal of positive stimuli, presentation of negative stimuli → negative effective states (ex. anger, frustration, disappointment, depression, fear) → antisocial behaviour (ex. drug abuse, delinquency, violence, dropping out)

cohen status frustration

trying to explain youth gang, and sometimes crime is just fun, crime is not rational, believed some youth did not fit into the status of middle class life so they formed gangs to be the antithesis to middle class life

techniques of neutralization

youth try to find a way to neutralize their behaviour, neutralize feelings of guilt

they can:

• deny the victim

• condemn condemners

• appeal to higher loyalties

• deny injury

• deny responsibility

differential association

crime was not about IQ or psychology, criminals learn about crime through other individuals that are defining criminal behaviour in a positive way

principles:
1. crime is learned like any other behaviour

2. crime is learned in interaction

3. learning crime occurs in intimate personal groups

4. learning crime includes learning techniques, motives, rationalization

5. if you have two forces of both ideologies but theres more forces for justifying crime a criminal will choose that side

social bond theory

criminal behaviour stems from beliefs, attachment, commitments, involvement in organizations

low self-control theory

argue crime is from low self-control, after ages 8-10 if parents have not taught child to delay gratification that child will have a much greater likelihood to commit crime, argued crime declines with age

social typing process

description (the label): label is placed on an individual because of an observed or presumed behaviour or characteristic → evaluation (the judgement): judgement is attached to the individual by virtue of the label was previously given → prescription (social control): because of the label that has been given and the resulting judgement that occurs, the individual is treated in a specific way—a way in which person would not be treated if the initial label had not been applied

erikson on institutions and deviance

pointed out how many institutions that are designed to get rid of deviance actually encourage it

• they reinforce alienation in society

• put deviants in close proximity exiled from society

• might be done since we dont really expect deviants to change

• there is no proper exit ceremony from places like prison, because of this deviants may be faced with no idea what to do and distrust from their community

• institutions having ex-deviants on radar can feed into the self-fufilling prophecy

• communities scared to accept deviants out of fear they will commit deviance again

functionalist theories on deviance

positivist theory that explains the causes of behaviour in terms of the various structures that fufill important functions for society

learning theories

positivist theories that explain the causes of behaviour in terms of the learning processes that people are subjected to

people learn to be deviant through interaction with other deviants

control theories

positivist theories that explain the causes of conforming behaviour rather than the causes of deviant behaviour

empathetic theories

attempt to understand deviance as a “human” thing, mainly through symbolic interactionism and interpretation, when we see a situation through the eyes of another

scientific theories

attempts to use scientific methodology to study deviances

positivism refers to the use of the scientific method and applying that to the social sciences

early biological positivism, thinks theres featurues of someone that point to them being deviant

ideological theories

explanations based on ideological views of the world

pre-scientific approaches, believed sources of crime were from the devil

inductive approach to measuring deviance

bottom-up approach, research looks at many specific cases then makes a generalization from those cases

deductive approach to measuring deviance

derive specific explanations from general rules, start with a theory, attempt to test that theory using variables

causality

when one variable changes the other changes

need to observe causal variable happens before the one that is effected

spurious

two possible causes for an effected variable

participant observation

taking part in the group you are studying, immerses themselves in day-to-day activities of the group they are studying

overt research

group knows about research

alice goffman, on the run

studying black youth in relation to the criminal justice system, befriended one of the cafeteria ladies and then tutored her daughter, then asked her brother if he wanted to be apart of her study, she gained access through ayesha and her brothers and people then thought of her as a cousin

covert research

group do not know about research

rosenhan, being sane in an insane place

wanted to study treatment of psychiatric patients, sent grad students into psychiatric hospitals faking illness, once they got admitted they stopped faking to observe if the psychiatrists in the facility could identify them as fake patients, none of the students were identified, this strongly questioned the power of psychiatric medicine, when students made claims that they were mentally well their insistence of being well was used against them to say they lost sanity

nonparticipant observation

not actually engaging with day-to-day activities but observing, asking questions as an outsider but not becoming actively involved

humphrey, tea room trade

observed men being sexual with one another, wondered where gay men did sexual acts and found it was mostly in the public bathroom, humphrey performed watch queen and watched outside of the washroom to make sure no one was coming while two men performed sexual acts, he gave his police friends addresses of the men and then gave them to another persons study and said he will interview them if they add them to this study, did it without their knowledge or consent

content analysis

when a researcher systematically analyzes materials ex. how many times a newspaper reports a certain event

convict criminology

when academics have served time and become sociologists

ethnography

live day-to-day life with who they are studying and immerse themselves with lifestyle from an insiders perspective, insert themselves into that culture

prescientific approaches to deviance

prior to the enlightenment, deviance was thought of as causal and supernatural

the trickster

in stories, known to be funny, witty, and deviant

usually masculine

violates social norms in a way that is fun and exciting

plays. with whats right and wrong

contemporary legends

claim to be based on fact rather than fiction or fantasy

often designed to express fear or desire for more social order

tend to be transmitted by word of mouth with people believing it happened to somebody

the pagan as deviant

pagans believed in multiple gods but they were redefined as agents of the devil by european settlers

christianity claimed rural pagans engaged in witchcraft

started a misogynistic war against women, hundreds of women who did not conform to social norms were murdered

pantheistic world view

doctrine that regards universe as a manifestation of the gods

deviance are acts of the gods or hostile spirits

deviance is not predictable or preventable

monotheistic world view

belief in only one god

deviance of all forms has some human accountability, for giving into the forces of evil

two pathways to deviance: temptation and possession

solutions to demonic deviance are either exorcism or destroying the demonic influence via purifying the individual through extreme suffering or death

witch craze: 1400-1700

prior to witch craze those who practiced witchcraft were tolerated, misunderstood, respected at times and viewed suspisciously at times

church cannon law then comes into place and witches were deluded

witches were then redefined as agents of the devil rather than harmless and misunderstood

roman catholic inquisition

tasked with rooting out witches over europe

malleus maleficarum

first book mass produced about witches, used by roman inquisition to tell people how to identify witches, explains why witches were such a huge danger in the first place

moral panic

rising fears that are out of all proportion to empirical evidence

alford plea

they claim innocence but acknowledge that the prosecution had rnough evidence to convict

west memphis three

three young boys likely tortured, mutilated, and killed

three troubled youth seen as prospects and argued boys were killed in some sort of satanic ritual

police found outcasts in community and accused them of doing it

involves the alford plea

demonic deviance

• was around during 1400-1700

• believed deviance came from evil

• explained deviance as a moral weakness, or temptation

• remedies were an exorcism or execution

benthams panopticon prison

• center in prison with a watch tower

• all around watchtower there are cells

• theres a center warden or watcher who observes all the cells, they can see any cell in the tower

  • this made inmates behave because they never knew when they were being watched

michelle foucault 1975

looked at criminal justice system and pointed out how when there were public executions at least people could revolt and not allow state to exercise execution regardless of what the public thought, after state moved punishment indoors people dont know what punishments are happening which doesnt allow people to revolt a judges decision

determinism

people are born criminal, born with weakness or something lacking that leads to deviance

physiogamy

facial features/characteristics and criminal behaviour, socrates looked at facial features to determine character

phrenology

assumed shape of skull revealed information about the brain beneath

used to justify european racial supremacy

negative characteristics were often said to be found in minority populations around the world

cesare lombroso (1835-1909)

believed criminals were atavistic throwbacks to an early period, believed criminals were under evolved, believed we could use physical charactersitics to identify those born inferior

characteristics he labelled under evolved were ones reminiscent of animals lower on the evolutionary ladder

• took a group of violent soldiers and decent soldiers and put them in two groups to observe physicality leading him to draw conclusions that more violent soldiers were less evolved

• female offenders were believed to just be more passive which is why they had lower crime rates

three types of offenders to cesare lombroso

1. those born criminal, atavistic reversions and lower in primitive evolutionary scale

2. insane criminals, those viewed as having mental illness or disability

3. group that did not have special physical characteristic but had emotional and mental makeup that would make them under certain circumstances commit deviance

garofalo and ferri

• followers of lombroso

• advanced work by arguing those biologically interior should be eliminated before they commit crime

• believed they should be locked up before commiting crime

shawn mckkay, social disorganization theory

did a number of studies in chicago, looking if crime varies across the city by examining school truancy and underage drinking, found high areas of deviance around city centers and found that communities had social disorganization that had a hard time creating social cohesion because

• low economic status, not about money but about being the least priviledged in a society

• ethnic heterogeniety (diverse population), groups dont feel similar and cant uphold their formal and informal social control over those in the neighborhood

• residential mobility, movement in and out, peoples goal was to move out most of the time

control theory

crime/deviance is fun, inner and outer controls limit individual motivation/propensity for crime

symbolic interactionism

society is a product of continuous face-to-face interaction, deviance is a social accomplishment and rarely practiced solo, socialization and labelling shape deviant identities and subcultures

frank tannenbaum

fathers of labelling theory

argues while most juvineilles will commit deviance, the distinguishment is when someone gets caught

most do not develop lifelong careers as criminals, however those who get caught are most likely to continue deviance, this comes from the label that is associated with someone once they are caught leading to the youth internalizing that label, becomes difficult to shake off deviant label

believed in radical nonintervention, youth should be left alone whenever possible, courts should not interfere when youths are engaging in typical deviant youthful behaviour

edwin lemert

looked at process of deviant change, labelling someone as deviant can cement identity of deviant

• primary deviance is youth accused of committing an act but not seeing themselves as deviant, unnoticed or neutralized by individual or others because it only happened once

• secondary deviance is when youth accused accept the label and sees themselves under the label, when deviant behaviour is repeated which leads to others finding it more difficult to neutralize, people define person as deviant and person sees themselves as deviant, successful labelling, the labelling of deviant leads the person feeling like it doesnt matter if they commit any deviant act because theyre already labelled as deviant

william chambliss

studied two groups of boys in hs, called them roughnecks and saints, was interested in how groups committed deviance, he followed them around and hung out with them while they hung out after school and found they were taking park in very similar types of deviance, saints even sometimes partook in more deviances

• social class helped saints avoid deviant label unlike the roughnecks

• saints had a car to drive out of city and commit deviance whereas the roughnecks were trapped in city

• police were kinder when approaching saints about deviance unlike roughnecks

• roughnecks didnt end up growing up successful because no one believed in them, saints moved on to become very successful

critical theories

crime is a response to conflict, change, and inequality

conflicting groups promote contesting notions of deviance and crime to impose control on others, often resulting in intensified conflict

think there are groups who advance their own unique interests and vary in status power and influence, status power and influence can greatly benefit how the criminal justice system affects you

critical theory is a big branch looking for deeper inequalities, conflict theory is mostly discussing means of production

thorsten sellins culture conflict theory

argued when immigrant children come to the US they are trapped between traditional culture and US culture, when the two cultures come together there is conflict

• american norms have been institutionalized and legitimized in criminal code, while their cultures norms have not

instrumental marxism

the state, government, military, law enforcement is a tool of the ruling class

• ruling class defines acts and behaviours not in their best interest as deviant, those in positions of power can use law to their advantage

structural marxism

powerful people dont just get what they want, politicians and state have to appease majority of people who are not powerful

• state upholds all capitalists through its laws

  • not that individual capitalists can have laws made to benefit them and their group but that all of the capitalists can benefit which upholds and protects capitalism