Sociology of Deviance & Social Control – Comprehensive Notes
Chapter Objectives
Clarify the sociological meaning of deviance and social control.
Map the major theoretical questions that guide sociologists who study deviance:
What counts as deviance?
Why does it occur?
How are deviant labels created, applied, and managed?
Popular vs. Sociological Definitions
Lay definitions rely on three intuitive yardsticks:
Illustration – listing obvious cases (criminals, addicts, etc.)
Statistical rarity – anything far from the mean (Figure 5.1’s left & right tails between x and x).
Problem: lumps together "failures" and "geniuses."
Harm – behavior that produces tangible injury (murder, theft).
Problem: many harmful acts appear respectable (corporate fraud); some labeled deviant produce little harm (mental illness).
Sociological definition: deviance = people, behaviors, and conditions that become targets of social control within specific contexts and time periods.
Objective vs. Subjective Dimensions
Objective: the concrete behavior/condition (e.g., smoking marijuana).
Subjective: the moral status society confers on that behavior (e.g., labeling pot‐smoking immoral or illegal).
Key implication: Nothing is inherently deviant; powerful audiences must label it so.
Forms of Social Control
Informal: name‐calling, ridicule, ostracism.
Formal: incarceration, executions.
Example: LGBT communities studied not because sociologists judge them deviant but because they are subject to control mechanisms.
Researching Deviance: Methods & Ethical Hurdles
Standard sociological tools: experiments, surveys, content analysis, ethnography.
Access & secrecy: Deviants often hide activities (e.g., flesh-hook pulling ritual: cheek skewering, chest hooks, ropes, spiritual framing).
Researcher built trust via informed consent & strict confidentiality.
Discovery of reportable behavior: Sudhir Venkatesh (Gang Leader for a Day)—caught between confidentiality and public safety.
Participant safety: Example of phone survey on male violence—interviewers trained to detect stress, protect respondents if abuser nearby.
Major Theoretical Explanations of Deviance
1. Strain Theory (Robert Merton; updated by Robert Agnew)
Society promises universal goals (material success) but offers unequal means.
Malintegration ⇒ strain ⇒ deviance as adaptation.
Modes of adaptation include innovating (theft), retreating (drug use).
Agnew adds two more strains:
Failure to avoid negative conditions (abusive parents).
Loss of valued stimuli (forced relocation, lost friendships).
Critiques: relies on official stats, underplays middle/upper‐class deviance.
2. Cultural Support / Differential Association (Edwin Sutherland)
Behavior mirrors definitions learned from intimate groups.
Must learn to view deviance as acceptable.
Society supplies both prohibitions and neutralization techniques ("I’m under-paid, a stolen pen is fair").
Useful for explaining "respectable" crimes (corporate fraud, digital piracy) embedded in competitive cultures.
3. Control Theory
Default tendency = pursue immediate interests (lying, stealing) unless controls restrain us.
Durkheim’s suicide: weak regulation & integration ⇒ higher suicide.
Travis Hirschi’s bond theory (juveniles): strong attachment to parents/teachers = less crime; weak bonds = freedom for self-interest.
4. Interactional / Transactional Views
Deviance as a joint accomplishment of at least two actors.
David Luckenbill’s 6-stage homicide script:
Victim’s initial insult.
Offender interprets it as threat to face.
Offender’s countermove to save face.
Victim’s aggressive retaliation (audience may egg on).
Brief violent exchange (fatal act).
Aftermath (flight or surrender).
Randall Collins: violence requires overcoming confrontational tension/fear.
Common pathways: attack a weak target, shift focus to third parties, build emotional energy via audiences.
Demographic Correlates of Deviance
Gender: Men dominate most criminal & violent acts.
Table 5.2 shows males’ arrest rates > females’ in all categories.
Women higher in depression/anxiety; men higher in addiction/psychosis.
Age: Street crime peaks late teens–early 20s, falls thereafter.
Suicide lower among youth; most mental illnesses onset in adolescence/young adulthood.
Class/Ethnicity:
Poor & minority groups appear over-represented in deviance and/or labeling.
Debate: higher actual offending vs. higher detection/labeling due to bias.
Social Construction, Claims-Making, and Moral Entrepreneurs
Social constructionism: deviant categories are negotiated, historically fluid.
Examples of shifting labels:
Smoking—once routine (elevators, classrooms); now heavily sanctioned.
Homosexuality—moved from exclusion to broader acceptance.
Claims-making process aims to:
Publicize a condition’s harmfulness (statistics, vivid cases).
Shape its moral frame (sin vs. crime vs. sickness).
Build consensus (media, experts, public).
Moral entrepreneurs (Howard Becker): crusaders, victims’ groups, lawmakers, journalists, talk-show hosts.
Persuasive claim strategies:
Alarming statistics: "X doubles every year".
Linking to known evils ("internet porn = new drug").
Emotionally charged typifications (Columbine as emblem of school violence).
Conflict Theories
Conservative Conflict: moral battles stem from status-group competition for scarce resources (ethnic, religious, professional, lifestyle).
Radical/Marxian Conflict: capitalism’s class exploitation underlies deviance.
Surplus labor ⇒ marginalized populations ⇒ criminalization.
Laws reflect bourgeois interests; poverty both objective & stigmatized.
Labeling, Stigma, and Deviant Careers
Label = master status acquired via status degradation ceremonies (court trials, psych exams).
Primary deviance: common rule-breaking with minimal identity impact.
Secondary deviance: internalization of deviant identity following societal reaction ⇒ self-fulfilling prophecy.
Resistance/Evasion:
Performances (apologetic scripts when stopped by police).
"Disclaimer mannerisms" to deflect labeling.
Managing Stigma (Erving Goffman):
Discreditable (hidden stigma): manage information, secrecy (e.g., HIV status).
Discredited (visible stigma): restrict relevance, seek purification, or collective stigma management (NORML, Coyote, NAAFA).
Deviancy Amplification: control efforts may escalate deviance (labeling → exclusion → deviant peers → more deviance).
Post-Modern Contributions
Focus on discourse—language systems that sort people into binary categories (normal/deviant).
Law is a dominant discourse that privileges some truth claims and marginalizes others.
Post-modern studies: homeless housing policy, female offender resistance strategies, reality-TV depictions of mental illness.
Goal: deconstruct binaries to reveal embedded power hierarchies.
Contemporary Reflections & Ethical / Practical Questions
Explosion of computer-related deviance: cyberporn, cyberstalking, Internet addiction.
Media fascination: Why are TV & film saturated with deviant themes? Possible reasons: dramatic conflict, audience escapism, moral panic generation.
Key ethical dilemmas for researchers: confidentiality vs. duty to report, ensuring participant safety, negotiating informed consent in hidden settings.
Integrative Summary
Deviance possesses two inseparable faces:
\text{Objective} – actual conduct/condition.
\text{Subjective} – societal judgment.
Causal theories (strain, culture, control, interaction) explain why rule-breaking appears rational, learned, unrestrained, or situational.
Constructionist theories illuminate how rules, labels, and moral hierarchies are produced via claims-making and conflict.
Labeling & stigma research shows how control efforts can reinvent selves, careers, and collective resistance.
Language/discourse itself is a form of power, organizing who counts as normal vs. deviant.
A rounded sociology of deviance therefore investigates:
\bigl[\text{Causes of Behavior}\bigr]\;\cap\;\bigl[\text{Creation of Moral Rules}\bigr]\;\cap\;\bigl[\text{Impact of Labels on Lives}\bigr]
Only by integrating these dimensions can we grasp how social groups identify, explain, and attempt to control the trouble-makers—and how the labeled resist, accommodate, or transform that control.