DEVIANCE

What is Deviance?
Deviance describes an action or behavior that violates social norms. Hence, it is not the act
itself, but the reactions to the act, that makes something deviant. Therefore people’s behavior
must be viewed from the framework of the culture in which that takes place in. Norms guide all
human activities, so the concept of deviance is very broad, for example one category of
deviance is crime, even this spans a wide range from minor traffics violations to prostitution,
sexual assault, and murder.
Deviants are those people who violate the norms and rules of society. People usually react
negatively.

Relativity of deviance- An act, which is called deviance by one group in one culture, is
considered as praise worthy by another group in another culture. Similarly what is deviance at
one time may not be considered so at another time. Look at somebody who is called by one
group as a terrorist and by another as a freedom fighter.
FORMAL AND INFORMAL DEVIANCE:
Formal deviance includes criminal violation of formally enacted laws. Examples of formal
deviance include robbery, theft, rape, murder, and assault. Informal deviance refers to violations
of informal social norms which are norms that have not been codified into law. Examples of
informal deviance include speaking loud, and standing with someone unnecessarily.
RELATIVISM AND DEVIANCE ✔
Deviance is a relative issue and standards for deviance change based on a number of factors:
• Location: A person speaking loudly during a church service would probably be considered
deviant whereas a person speaking loudly at a party would not. Society generally regards taking
the life of another person to be a deviant act but during wartime killing another person is not
considered deviant.
• Age: A five year old can cry in a supermarket without being considered deviant but an older
child or an adult cannot.
• Social Status: A famous actor can skip to the front of a long line of people waiting to get into a
popular club but a non-famous person would be considered deviant for trying to do the same.

Primary and Secondary Deviation:

The action that provokes only slight reaction from others and has little effect on a person’s self-
concept is primary deviance. But when people notice some one’s deviance and make something
of it and give a label on repeated violations, may be as a reaction the person repeatedly violates
a norm and begins to take on a deviant identity. This may be called as secondary deviation.
Example

So Tommy is five years old and his mother has taking him to a store. Now this store has a pick
and mix stand and Tommy loves his chocolate. So when his mom isn’t looking, Tommy takes
some chocolate mice and carries on like nothing happened. Unfortunately, the clerk saw him
eat the chocolate and he gets into trouble with mummy.
This is primary deviance. The clerk doesn’t call the police because it’s justified as childhood
behaviour. When Tommy gets older, he would describe it as a “moment of madness”. No one
has labelled Tommy as a thief. It is not affected his status or how society views Tommy,
therefore according to Lemert primary deviance is pointless to study as it has no effect on the
individual or society.
However, as Tommy gets older he continues to steal and at the age of 18 Tommy steals a car
from the local Mercedes dealership. Tommy gets caught and sent to prison for 10 years but
when he comes out he is still viewed as “that thief”. This makes it hard Tommy to get a job and
because he needs money to survive, Tommy joins the neighborhood gang and once again
reverts to crime.
This is what Lemert calls secondary deviance – crime caused by a societal reaction. Society
viewed Tommy as nothing more than a thief, so “thief” became Tommy’s master status. This
puts Tommy in a self-concept crisis because he doesn’t know how he fits into society any more
– no one likes him, he cannot get a job. He joins neighborhood gang in order to be around
people who accept his master status. Therefore, Tommy reverts to crime because of his label.

The Social Foundations of Deviance:

In the sociological perspective all behavior – deviance as well as conformity – is shaped by
society. Therefore, the society lays the foundation of deviance. As the state law permits
prostitution in rural areas of Nevada, although the practice is outlawed in the rest of the United
States.
The social foundations of deviance may be looked at from three dimensions:
1. Cultural relativity of deviance:
No thought or action is inherently deviant; it becomes deviant only in relation to particular
norms. Sociologists use the term deviance to refer to a violation of norms of culture. One may
look at three basic principles:
(1) It is not the action itself, but the reactions to the act that makes something deviant. In other
words people’s behavior must be viewed from the framework of the culture in which it takes
place.
(2) Different groups are likely to have different norms therefore what is deviant to some is not
deviant to others.
(3) This principle holds within a society as well as across cultures. Thus, acts perfectly
acceptable in one culture – or in one group within a society – may be considered deviant in
another culture, or in another group within the same society.
Sociologists use the term deviance non-judgmentally, to refer to any act to which people
respond negatively. It does not mean that they agree that the act is bad, just because others
judge it negatively. If we have to understand a particular behavior, we must understand the
meanings people give to that event. For example, Text messaging while driving is legal in forty-
one states but against the law in six others (three other states forbid the practice for young
drivers).
2. Who defines deviance?
People become deviant as others define them that way. If deviance does not lie in the act, but
in definition of the act, where do these definitions come from? The simple answer is that the
definitions come from people. May be through trial and error process people determine the
appropriate patterns of behavior for the smooth functioning of their society. They themselves
decide what is desirable and what is undesirable for having social order in their society which
are actually the social norms of the people. These norms are incorporated in the mechanics of
social control. The process may be a little different in a simple and small society than in a
complex and large society having ethnic variations. Everyone violates cultural norms at one
time or another. Have you ever walked around talking to yourself? Whether such behavior
defines us as mentally ill or criminal depends on how others perceive, define, and respond to it.

3. Both rule making and rule breaking involve social power.

Each society is dominated by a group of elite, powerful people, who make the decisions for
making rules, which become part of the social control system in the society usually represents
the interests of people with social power. The law, declared Karl Marx, is the means by which
powerful people protect their interests. For example the owners of an unprofitable factory
have the legal right to shut down their business, even if doing so puts thousands of workers out
of work. But if a worker commits an act of vandalism that closes the same factory for a single
day is subject to criminal prosecution. Another example is that, if a homeless person who
stands on a street corner speaking out against the government gets arrested for disturbing the
peace; a mayoral candidate during an election campaign who does exactly the same thing gets
police protection. In short, the norms and how we apply them reflect social inequality.
BIOLOGICAL THEORIES OF DEVIANCE: ✔
A biological theory of deviance proposes that an individual deviates from social norms largely
because of their biological makeup.
CESARE LOMBROSO:
Medical Criminologist Cesare Lombroso argued that criminality was a biological trait found in
some human beings. The theory gave explanation that some individuals had a biological
propensity for crime. Lombroso's general theory suggested that criminals are distinguished from
non-criminals by multiple physical abnomalies. He postulated that criminals represented a
primitive or subhuman type of person. Lombroso became convinced that could be anatomically
identified by such items as a sloping forehead, ears of unusual size, excessive length of arms and
other "physical stigmata". Specific criminals such as thieves, rapists and murderers could be
distinguished by specific characteristics, he believed.
ENRICO FERRI:
Ferry’s work on penology (the section of criminology that is concerned with the philosophy and
practice of various societies in their attempt to repress criminal activities) Ferry argued that
anyone convicted of a crime should be detained for as long as possible. According to Ferry’s line
of thought, if individuals committed crimes because of their biological constitution there was no
point of deterrence or rehabilitation. For Ferry, none of these therapeutic interventions could
change the offender's biology. After an individual had been convicted of a crime, the state's
responsibility was to protect the community and prevent the criminal from doing more harm.
RAFFAELO GAROFALO:
Garofalo is perhaps best known for his efforts to formulate a "natural" definition of crime.
Classical thinkers accepted the legal definition of crime uncritically; crime is what the law says it
is. This appeared to be rather arbitrary and "unscientific" to Garofalo. According to Garofalo a
given act would be considered a crime if it were universally condemned, and it would be
universally condemned if it offended the natural altruistic sentiments of probity (integrity,
honesty) and pity (compassion, sympathy).