Chapter 1 - Determining Deviance Flashcards
(52 cards)
What is deviance and what does it reflect?
a highly contested concept, reflecting the “problem of definition” (e.g., dictionary definitions, individual definitions, “nuts, sluts, and perverts”)
- straying from accepted norms (dictionary definition), and is a reflection of our own personal experiences and beliefs
‘nuts sluts and perverts’
condemnation judging tolerance, not the whole of deviance
- doesn’t allow us to consider things like white collar crime – quite well respected in their communities, but cause harm to communities
Do most people use subjective approaches, objective or both?
Combine both
Objective approaches
focus on the ACT of deviance; deviance is defined by a common characteristic; we know it when we see it
- understanding it, does not matter what it is
- trying to understand the WHY of what things people do: why do people drink etc.
Subjective approaches
focus on the PERCEPTIONS of and REACTIONS to deviance; deviance is not associated with a particular characteristic but is socially defined; we are taught what is deviant,
- something that has to be learned as we socialize into our respective cultures at particular points in time
- HOW is it that some things become deviant and some not
- WHY do we respond in some ways to some deviant actions
Statistical Rarity
Objective approach: something is deviant if it is rare
- but how do we define “rare”?
- how rare does it have to be to be deviant
- also, some behaviours, beliefs, or characteristics are not rare but are still considered deviant
- conversely, many behaviours, beliefs, or characteristics are rare but not considered deviant
- not helpful in determining deviance
Harm
Objective - something is deviant if it causes harm (e.g., physical, emotional, social, or ontological)
- but perceptions of harm vary over time
- perceptions of harm are also subjective
- sometimes reactions cause more harm than the deviance itself
How can something be social harm?
if it interferes with social order or social stability, undermines the smooth functioning of society
How can something be ontological harm?
if something threatens our world view, how we view the world (radical religious movement)
How can perceptions of harm be subjective?
One’s person’s ideas of harm may not mesh with another person’s ideas
Live and let live philosophy – what you do is no one’s business if you are not harming others
What is an example of reactions causing more harm that the deviance itself?
Criminalizing drug use: does not get to root of addiction, causes more problems, worse than the deviance itself
- people who have a criminal identity are blocked from certain opportunities like employment and being productive
- broader financial harm to the rest of society, lots of money to lock people up, diverts money from where it would be better spent on helping addiction
- pit people against one another in society, ‘us versus them’
- contempt and loathing for those who use drugs and are vulnerable
Societal Reaction
Objective - something is deviant if society reacts negatively
- but why some things and not others?
- also, how strong a reaction and how many negative reactions must there be to be deviant?
- some people’s reactions count more than others (some above those of children, students, working class..)
- and policy-making is often based on something other than societal opinion
- what those in power believe to be right
Normative violation
Objective - something is deviant if it violates a norm (absolutist views have given way to more relativist views)
- but not all norms are the same (e.g., folkways vs. mores vs. laws)
- and where do these norms come from? (e.g., consensus vs. conflict vs. interactionist views)
- the concept of norms implies consensus (e.g., high-consensus deviance vs. low-consensus deviance)
- and what about situational variations?
Norms
Expected behaviours
Absolutist views
based on the belief that a particular behaviour is INHERENTLY or UNIVERSALLY deviant
- incest is deviant everywhere!!!
Relativist Views
context matters. Norms change all the time and vary from culture to culture, culturally specific and specific to historical periods
- only deviant if you are violating a norm that is relevant in a culture at a particular time
- incest is normative in that culture
Folkways
everyday norms and customs, informal, not written down somewhere, learned as part of socialization to a culture, passed on orally from one generation to the next
- When people violate them there is not a strong reaction: shake their heads, social avoidance, people will think you are odd or rude, not too big of a deal.
- While they are important for the functioning of society, they do not invoke a serious reaction when violated
Mores
informal norms, but with more force, invokes a stronger reaction when violated, because people assume you are immoral
- You are violating the moral fabric of society, more threatening with your behaviour
- Can be fired, expelled, shunned, excommunicated
Laws
formal in the sense that the laws are written down. What we cannot do, what happens if we break them. Norms society thinks are very important. Very serious consequences
Prescriptive Norms
things that we SHOULD do, normative expectations.
- Taxes, wait in line in shops, keeping the door open for someone
Proscriptive Norms
things that we SHOULD NOT do. Should not cheat on exams, no stealing, no lying on the witness stand
Consensus View of Law
laws arising from general society consensus
- e.g. murder. Exists because of consensus
Conflict View of Law
law is not so much based on consensus, but used by society’s higher classes to promote and protect their own interests.
- E.g. loitering laws
Interactionist View of Law
yes society’s most power influence law, but they do that also because of demands made by interest groups, not always in their same class.
- E.g. religious leaders, policing, physicians, something they see as problematic and lobby it to higher class members
