Deviant Behavior Essay

The research done in this paper provides a better understanding of deviance and social control. There are various factors to research on the topic to develop a complete understanding of the two ideas. Specifically, the goal is to identify factors that directly impact deviance and social control and if one can exist without the other. These topics provide a better understanding of the human behavior and actions because of social control and societal norms. The focus of this discussion is to provide a detailed analysis of societal norms, deviance, and social control. I have used supporting research and my own personal ideas to develop the findings in this paper. It has become evident that without societal norms there would be no social

The four theories of deviance are The Learning Theory, The Strain Theory, The Social-Bond Theory and the Labeling Theory. These theories alone can explain the reasoning behind someone’s deviant behavior. But, in There Are No Children Here we see all of these theories being demonstrated. This lets us have an understanding of exactly why we are seeing the deviant behavior that we are.

People who suffer from personality disorders often display deviant behavior. The mental illness itself is not deviant. They typically have problems with social skills, mood swings, emotional states, and are often unable to maintain healthy, stable relationships. Many sufferers do not possess the capability to have genuine emotions, including empathy for others. A personality disorder is the basis of many circumstances of maladaptive behavior including substance abuse, self-harm, suicide, and criminality.

Deviance is an action or behavior that violates social norms, including a formally enacted rule, as well as informal violations of social norms. Deviant behavior is any behavior that is contrary to the dominant norms of society. Norms are rules and expectation by which members of society are conventionally guided. Social norms differ from culture to culture. Deviance can be criminal or non-criminal.

There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.

According to Lombroso his theories were sparked by an autopsy of a criminal in an insane asylum. He discovered an abnormality that he deemed to be common with lower animals. Lombroso is quoted as saying, “At the sight of that skull, I seemed to see all of a sudden (…) the problem of the nature of the criminal – an atavistic being who reproduces in his person the ferocious instincts of primitive humanity and the inferior animals.” By modern standards Lombroso’s sweeping generalizations would be regarded as crude at best. However, Lombroso did indicate many symptoms of mental illness as possible indicators of “born criminality.” The epileptic and the insane were a subset within Lombroso’s “born criminal.” Many of his assertions on the attributes of criminals were wildly off base, however he did bring a focus onto the biological and away from the soul as the reason for deviance. His assumptions spread far and wide throughout the nineteenth century; for example during a trial in Ohio a housekeeper’s head was measured to see whether or not she should be charged with the poisoning of a young boy. Lombroso himself performed thousands of autopsies and examined many a brain. His theories inspired a craze for dissection and understanding of the brain.

A cross-cultural examination of certain deviant acts surface interesting observations of both the root of function of deviance in that given society. This observation will illustrate how the ways in which deviance is viewed in a specific culture is not universal. The author also touches upon how the “concept of normal” is equated with the “concept of good”; therefore, by consequence, anything remotely outside this pre-established box is viewed in a negative manner (Benedict 1934:4). The category of deviance is employed by society as a strategic means of reducing diversity, maintaining order and above else, upholding the social norm. Individuals who threaten this system are immediately labeled as evil wrongdoers who are then treated differently on every level. A further scholar, Erikson, compares the social system to a “nucleus, “which” draws the behavior of actors toward [itself] within range of basic norms,” (Erikson 1962: 309). This analogy provides powerful imagery of how the social system functions and the reason for why deviance is seen as such a threatening act. He further draws a comparison between the law and the norm arguing that both are reinforced by consistently being “used as a basis for judgment,” (Erikson 1962: 310). The entanglement of

Deviance is a behavior, trait or belief that is not the norm and provokes a negative reaction in a particular group. The documentary, “Prison State”, explores four citizens who have been deemed deviant under law in the United States. The main focus of this documentary is crime, punishment, and the cycle that filters people in and out of the penitentiary. The documentary can be supported by many examples and theories of deviance explained in chapter six of the textbook, however there are a couple that are more prevalent than others, such as, crime and demographics, as well as, deterrence and punishment. Crime is a type of deviance that is punishable when enforced by the law.

Those people who are labelled as deviant may seek out others in the same situation. They provide understanding and support since they share the same problems. Within this group a deviant sub-culture may develop in which a deviant lifestyle is a major concern. This can be seen in certain gay communities particularly in the United States. Those forced into ‘deviant communities’ now see themselves as different from the wider society and act accordingly.

Deviance can be defined as an absence of conformity to the social norm. Not all deviant behavior is necessarily illegal or harmful to individuals, these behaviors can range from standing in another’s personal space to murdering another individual. In some cases, it can be looked upon as a positive change or a unique and favorable act. Although, considered deviant because it is not the social norm, it still can have a very positive social aspect or lead to social change. Culture and the societies within these cultures have a significant impact on what is considered deviant and what is acceptable or even lawful behavior. The degree of deviance is measured by society’s reaction towards the action and the lawful sanctions that may take

Within any culture lies an array of definitive demeanors and actions that are deemed socially adequate and inadequate. Depending on the distinguishing behavior of a given individual and the society that they live in, there are invisible “laws” that prevent people from acting a certain way. If the individual’s behavior is adverse to the superior, predominant norms of their society, the actions of that individual are considered to be deviant. Social deviance in shown in a variety of dissimilar faces: within physical appearance, actions done to oneself and others, and religious groups.

Deviance is socially constructed because it is defined and outlined firmly by society’s norms. As a result, a deviant act in one society may not be considered deviant within a different society. Societies define themselves through the shared common values of the individuals and in order for a society to maintain these values and cultural identity they create and maintain boundaries (Erikson, 2005, p17). These boundaries allow individuals to relate to each other in an articulate manner and so that they may develop a position within society (Erikson, 2005, p17). The boundaries are created by individuals’ behavior and interactions in their regular social relations. Deviance then becomes the actions which society perceived to be outside of its boundaries. In other words, an act is viewed as deviant when it falls outside of those commonly shared values and norms which created the boundaries. This is because the society is making a declaration about the disposition and arrangement of their boundaries. Boundaries are not fixed to any society rather they shift as the individual’s redefine their margins and position on a larger cultural map (Erikson, 2005, p20).

Deviance and crime are wide-ranging terms used by sociologists to refer to behavior that varies, in some way, from a social norm. Cultural Norms are society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people. This essay will evaluate the sociological theories associated with crime and deviance and to compare and contrast these main theories. And find links between these theories to today’s society. There are various Sociological deviance theories, including Structuralist: why do some people break the rules? ,

Have you ever experienced a time when your parents called you a genius and you truly felt like one? How about when a professor pointed fingers at you because he thought you were cheating on a test? Most certainly you felt some type of shame or guilt; or probably got so tired of your colleagues negative thoughts that you decided to embrace it and just go along with it. These are just a few examples of the impact that people’s opinions or thoughts can have on your reputation. Think for a second about the Stanford Prison Experiment, which demonstrates the influential role that a situation can play in human behavior. The individuals chosen to perform as guards were placed in a position of power and thus they began

Cesare Lombroso, an Italian army doctor, is considered by many as the founder of the scientific school of criminology, drew physiological conclusions. Lombroso¡¦s infamous work, L¡¦Uomo Delinquents (1876), first developed the idea of the atavistic criminal. Atavism, a term originally used by Charles Darwin, suggests that in the process of human evolution some individuals can represent a genetic ¡¨throwback¡¨. Utilizing this idea, Lombroso debated that the criminal individual was born so. Physical indication of criminal potential could be identified through specific bodily characteristics, all of which suggested the bearer was a throwback from a more primitive age. These physical characteristics included abnormal teeth, extra nipples, extra or missing toes and fingers, large ears and an overly prominent jawbone. Later research however, found no support for Lombroso¡¦s ideas.