What is Deviant Behavior?

Criminology and Penology
Theories
Anomie
Differential Association Theory
Deviance
Labeling Theory
Rational Choice Theory
Social Control Theory
Social Disorganization Theory
Social Learning Theory
Strain Theory
Subcultural Theory
Symbolic Interactionism  Victimology
Types of crimes
Blue-collar crime  Corporate crime
Juvenile crime
Organized crime
Political crime  Public order crime
Public order case law in the U.S.
State crime  State-corporate crime
White-collar crime  Victimless crime
Penology
Deterrence  Prison
Prison reform  Prisoner abuse
Prisoners' rights  Rehabilitation
Recidivism  Retribution
Utilitarianism
See also:
This box:  •  • [ edit]

Deviant behavior is behavior that is a recognized violation of social norms. Formal and informal social controls attempt to prevent or minimize deviance. One such control is through the medicalization of deviance. It is not the act itself, but the reactions to the act, that make something deviant.

Crime, the violation of formally enacted law, is formal deviance while an informal social violation such as picking one's nose is an example of informal deviance. It also means not doing what the majority does or alternatively doing what the majority does not do. For instance, behaviors caused by cultural difference can be seen as deviance. It does not necessarily mean criminal behavior.

An example of a group considered deviant in the modern United States is the Ku Klux Klan. Milder examples include punks and goths.

Early theories of deviance

The Classical School of criminology and the Italian School (along with criminal anthropology) are two early theories regarding deviant behavior. The Classical School comes from the works of Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Beccaria assumed a utilitarian view of society along with a social contract theory of the state. He argued that the role of the state was to maximize the greatest possible utility to the maximum amount of people and to minimize those actions that harm the society. He argued that deviants commit deviant acts (which are harmful to the society) because of the utility it gives to the private individual. If the state were to match the pain of punishments with the utility of various deviant behaviors, the deviant would no longer have any incentive to commit deviant acts. (Note that Beccaria argued for just punishment as raising the severity of punishments without regard to logical measurement of utility would cause increasing degrees of social harm once it reached a certain point.) The Italian School is a criminological school that studies the biological factors which may contribute to crime and deviance. Syafriwaldi, Criminology

Classical theories of deviance

There are three broad classic sociological studies on deviant behavior which are Structural Functionalism, Symbolic Interactionism, and Power Conflict studies.

Structural-Functionalism

Deviations come from the formation of norms and values which are enforced by institutions. Deviations are not deviant by nature, but are caused when institutions arbitrarily institute particular prescriptions or proscriptions. Therefore, deviation is simply what is defined as not normal by norms, values, or laws. Theorists from this school study how institutions on a macro level affect deviance.

Emile Durkheim was a nineteenth century French sociologist who studied suicide and the role of institutions in suicide. When he studied the connections between suicide and people's lives, he noticed that social integration and social regulation rates were inversely correlated with suicide rates. Suicidal people tended to have less, "to bind and connect them to stable social norms and goals."^[1] However, those who were well integrated into society and those who were well regulated (good social bonds) tended to have the lowest suicide rates.

There are two dimensions of the social bond which are social integration and social regulation, and they are for the most part independent (in other words, the rate of integration does not determine the rate of regulation, and vice versa, but both affect the social bond). Social integration is the attachment to groups and institutions, while social regulation is the adherence to the norms and values of the society. Those who are very integrated fall under the category of "altruism" and those who are very unintegrated fall under "egoism." Similarly, those who are very regulated fall under "fatalism" and those who are very unregulated fall under "anomie". Durkheim's strain theory attributes social deviance to extremes of the dimensions of the social bond. Altruistic suicide (death for the good of the group), egoistic suicide (death for the removal of the self due to or justified by the lack of ties to others), and anomic suicide (death due to the confounding of self-interest and societal norms) are the three forms of suicide that can happen due to extremes. Likewise, individuals may commit crimes for the good of an individual's group, for the self due to or justified by lack of ties, or because the societal norms that place the individual in check no longer have power due to society's corruption.

• * Two dimensions of the social bond:
• Integration (Attachment to groups, and strength of ties)
• Altruism (+)
• Egoism (-)
• Regulation (The attachment to norms of society)
• Fatalism (+)
• Anomie (-)
• Mechanical Solidarity
• Organic Solidarity

+economic anomie +domestic anomie

• Robert King Merton (the Strain Theory)

Robert King Merton expanded on the idea that anomie is the alienation of the self from society due to conflicting norms and interests by describing 5 different types of actions that occur when personal goals and legitimate means come into conflict with each other.^[2] Instead of social integration and social regulation, Merton focused on the two variables of goals and legitimate means. These two dimensions determine the adaptation to society according to the cultural goals, which are the society's perceptions about the ideal life, and to the institutionalized means, which are the legitimate means through which an individual may aspire to the cultural goals. There are 5 possible combinations of adaptation. When an individual accepts the goals and means together, he is working under conformity. (Example: White collar employee who holds a job to support a family.) When an individual accepts the goals but uses illegitimate means in order to achieve them, he commits crimes in order to emulate the values of those who conform; in other words, they must use innovation in order to achieve cultural goals. (Example: Drug dealer who sells drugs to support a family.) An individual may lose faith in cultural goals but still feel obligated to work under the routines of legitimate daily life. This person is practicing ritualism. (Example: A white collar employee who holds a job, but has become completely discontent with the American Dream.) Individuals may also reject both goals and means and fall under retreatism, when they ignore the goals and the means of the society. (Example: Drug addicts who have stopped caring about the social goals and use drugs as a way to escape reality.) Finally, there is a fifth type of adaptation which is that of rebellion, where the individual rejects the cultural goals and the institutionalized means, but seeks to redefine new values for society. (Example: Radicals who want to repair or even destroy the capitalist system in order to build a new social structure.)

• * Durkheim states that anomie is the confounding of social norms. Merton goes further and states that anomie is the state in which social goals and the legitimate means to achieve them do not correspond.
• 5 ways of adaptation to society according to Culture Goals (A) and Institutionalized Means (B)
• Conformity: A+B+
• Innovations: A+B-
• Ritualism: A-B+
• Retreatism: A-B-
• Rebellion: A(Change)B(Change)

Symbolic Interactionism

Deviance comes from the individual, who learns deviant behavior. The deviant may grow up alongside other deviants or may learn to give excuses for deviance. The focus is upon the consciousness and the mind of the individual as opposed to the institutions from where the norms come from.

• Edwin H. Sutherland (Differential Association Theory)

In his differential association theory, Edwin Sutherland posited that criminals learn criminal and deviant behaviors and that deviance is not inherently a part of a particular individual's nature. Also, he argues that criminal behavior is learned in the same way that all other behaviors are learned, meaning that the acquisition of criminal knowledge is not unique compared to the learning of other behaviors. Sutherland outlined some very basic points in his theory, such as the idea that the learning comes from the interactions between individuals and groups, using communication of symbols and ideas. When the symbols and ideas about deviation are much more favorable than unfavorable, the individual tends to take a favorable view upon deviance and will resort to more of these behaviors.

• * Criminal behavior (motivations and technical knowledge), as with any other sort of behavior, is learned.
• Some basic assumptions:
• Learning in interaction using communication within intimate personal groups.
• Techniques, motives, drives, rationalizations, and attitudes are all learned.
• Excess of definitions favorable to deviation.
• Legitimate and illegitimate behavior both express the same general needs and values.
• Gresham H. Sykes And David Matza (Neutralization Theory)

Gresham Sykes and David Matza's neutralization theory explains how deviants justified their deviant behaviors by adjusting the definitions of their actions and by explaining to themselves and others the lack of guilt of their actions in particular situations. There are five different types of rationalizations, which are the denial of responsibility, the denial of injury, the denial of the victim, the condemnation of the condemners, and the appeal to higher loyalties. The denial of responsibility is the argument that the deviant was helplessly propelled into the deviance, and that under the same circumstances, any other person would resort to similar actions. The denial of injury is the argument that the deviant did not hurt anyone, and thus the deviance is not morally wrong, due to the fundamental belief that the action caused no harm to other individuals or to the society. The denial of the victim is the argument that possible individuals on the receiving end of the deviance were not injured, but rather experiences righteous force, due to the victim's lack of virtue or morals. The condemnation of the condemners is the act by which the deviant accuses authority figures or victims for having the tendency to be equally deviant, and as a result, hypocrites. Finally, the appeal to higher loyalties is the belief that there are loyalties and values that go beyond the confines of the law; friendships and traditions are more important to the deviant than legal boundaries.

• * Neutralization Theory. Criminals rationalize actions by neutralizing the definitions of crime.
• 5 major types of neutralization:
• Denial Of Responsibility: Propelled helplessly into crime.
• Denial Of Injury: Crime does not hurt anyone, not morally wrong.
• Denial Of The Victim: Victim did not receive injury but rather, rightful force.
• Condemnation Of The Condemners: Condemners are hypocrites, deviants as well.
• Appeal To Higher Loyalties: Loyalty to a higher power than law, like friendship.
• Frank Tannenbaum And Howard S. Becker (Labeling theory)

Frank Tannenbaum and Howard S. Becker created and developed labeling theory, starting with Tannenbaum's "dramatization of evil." In short, when a supposed deviant is subjected to punishments meted out by the institutions, the actor reacts to the labels that are applied to him or her. As time goes on, the "deviant" takes on traits that define what a real deviant is supposed to do and takes on the role of such a label by committing deviations that conform to the label. Individual and societal preoccupation with the deviant label lead the deviant individual to follow a self-fulfilling prophecy of conformity to the ascribed label. Thus, these two sociologists criticize institutions for creating deviants rather than their supposed role of stopping deviation.

• * Dramatization Of Evil: The actor reacts to the labels applied to him or her, and the person acts more and more like the label, taking more and more traits. Eventually, in a self-fulfilling prophecy, the actor takes on all of the labels. Labeling is the process by which deviance is recognized.
• Edwin Lemert (Primary And Secondary Deviation)

Edwin Lemert developed the idea of primary and secondary deviation as a way to explain the process of labeling. Primary deviance is any general deviance before the deviant is labeled as such. Secondary deviance is any action that takes place after primary deviance as a reaction to the institutions. When an actor commits a crime (primary deviance), however mild, the institution will bring social penalties down on the actor. However, punishment does not necessarily stop crime, so the actor might commit the same primary deviance again, bringing even harsher reactions from the institutions. At this point, the actor will start to resent the institution, while the institution brings harsher and harsher repression. Eventually, the whole community will stigmatize the actor as a deviant and the actor will not be able to tolerate this, but will ultimately accept his or her role as a criminal, and will commit criminal acts that fit the role of a criminal.

• * Primary And Secondary Deviation is what causes people to become harder criminals.
• Primary deviance is the time when the person is labeled deviant through confession or reporting. Secondary deviance is deviance before and after the primary deviance.
• Retrospective labeling happens when the deviant recognizes his acts as deviant prior to the primary deviance, while prospective labeling is when the deviant recognizes future acts as deviant.
• Steps to becoming a criminal:

1. Primary deviation.
2. Social penalties.
3. Secondary deviation.
4. Stronger penalties.
5. Further deviation with resentment and hostility towards punishers.
6. Community stigmatizes the deviant as a criminal. Tolerance threshold passed.
7. Strengthening of deviant conduct because of stigmatizing penalties.
8. Acceptance as role of deviant or criminal actor.

Power-Conflict Theories

Power conflict theorists see the manifestations of power into certain institutions as what cause deviance. The institution's ability to change norms, wealth, status, etc come into conflict with the individual's self. Therefore, these theorists study how the use of power from institutions and the society affect the deviant behaviors of the individual.

• Marxism
• Marx himself did not write about deviant behavior but he wrote about alienation between the proletariat as well as between the proletariat and the finished product which causes conflicts and thus deviant behavior.
• Marxist writers who use the theory of the capitalist state in their arguments:
• Steven Spitzer - Bourgeosie control over social junk and social dynamite
• Georg Rusche - The analysis of different punishments correlated to the social capacity and infrastructure for labor. Throughout history, when more labor is needed, the severity of punishments decreases and the tolerance for deviant behavior increases.
• Jock Young - The modern world did not approve of diversity but was not afraid of social conflict. The late modern world, however, is very tolerant of diversity but is extremely afraid of social conflicts, which is an explanation for the political correctness movement. The late modern society easily accepts difference, but it labels those that it does not want as deviant and relentlessly punishes and persecutes.
• Michel Foucault
• Torture has been phased out from our modern society due to the dispersion of power. No need anymore for the wrath of the state upon the deviant individual.
• The modern state praises itself for its fairness and dispersion of power.
• The dispersion of power is used to control individuals together in a mass.
• Institutions are built to control people with the use of discipline.
• The modern prison (more specifically the panopticon) is a template for these institutions because it controls its inmates by the perfect use of discipline.
• In a sense, the postmodern society is characterized by the lack of free will on the part of individuals. The hyper-fatalistic and extreme structural function view that it is institutions of knowledge, norms, and values which categorize and control humans.

Social foundations of deviance

• Deviance varies according to cultural norms
• Deviance is dependent on belief
• People become deviant as others define them as such
• Both rule making and breaking involve social power

Functions of deviance

• Affirms cultural values and norms
• Clarifies moral boundaries
• Promotes social unity by creating an us/them dichotomy
• Encourages social change
• Provides jobs to control deviance
• Deviant acts are always assertions of individuality and sense of identity, comprising acts of rebellion against group norms

Types of deviance

A taboo is a form of behavior considered so deviant by the majority, that to speak of it publicly is condemned, and almost entirely avoided. Examples of such behavior can include coprophilia, murder, rape, incest, necrophilia, child molestation or even something as commonplace as defecating or urinating.

Deviance in literature

Many works of literature provide allegories of the conflict between character and society, in which the character does not conform to the society's norms and is therefore alienated, ostracized, or even discriminated or persecuted. Examples: 1. The Stranger (novel)

References