Social Deviance: Why Are the Activities of Lower-Income Individuals More Often Defined as Criminal Than Those of Middle- and Upper- Income Persons, Essay Example

Introduction

Deviance is an area that has attracted the attention of many social scientists and particularly sociologists and psychologists. While there has been such much interest in an individual’s social deviance in relation to the immediate society, every scholar that has attempted to debunk on this issue has generated his own postulation in an endeavor to bring a better and deeper understanding of the issue.

Discussion

Social deviance may be looked at as an individual’s behavior or actions that do not conform to the established cultural norms as observed by social audiences. These violations may be formal or informal violations. It is clear that defining social deviance precisely may not be easy or possible given that there is diversity in what a given culture considers as a deviance, another culture identifies with it as an integral defining part of culture. For instance, while it might be acceptable by a given culture to throw jabs in the air as a show of excitement and achievement, another culture might label that as an indication of violent behavior. Deviance can also be understood as an individual attribute that is supported by patterns of social institutions in the society.

We can clearly understand the role that power plays in determining what can be regarded as deviant via the conflict theory. The theories illustrates that whoever considered deviant is sometimes powerless in the society or on the other hand, considered as the have-nots. This happens because all the social structures go hand and hand with the wellbeing of the haves. Conflict explains further that the street crime which is more done by the have-nots exists in harder penalties than the corporate crime ad the white collar crime. Mental illness is one presumable social deviance that social systems can trigger by creating powerful social effects. When social systems make judgments about a person to have a presumable deviant behavior, the labeled individual is likely to maintain that behavior. Nevertheless, Emile Durkheim recognizes that the line of scrutiny taken by labeling theory does indeed fail to offer an explanation to why the deviant behavior occurs in the place. Even that, an individual is forced to play the role of the character the society labels on him. Total institutions are not just meant for individuals who exhibit social deviance in the society.

Other groups of individuals are catered for by various types of total institutions, for instance, institutions that cater for the blind, the orphaned, work-like tasks like the barracks and for serving religious purposes like the religious training institutions. Labeling theory is as well used by interaction to illustrate theory. According to the theory of labeling deviance is not only about the act itself, but it is all about how people react to the act itself. The theory as well illustrates on how society labels individuals.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the book of Emile Durkheim provides a unique contribution to the sociological literature of the concept of social deviance by relating sociological concepts of diverse application to the everyday interactions of an individual to the immediate society. This has helped in bringing a deeper understanding of the aspect of social deviance as an integral facet of everyday sociological interactions. Emile Durkheim helps in bringing an in-depth understanding of the significance of total institutions and their interconnection with deviant behavior in the society. On the other hand the book gives a succinct identification of how the deviant behavior starts and highlights the relationship between the response of deviant behavior and continuation of the deviant acts by the individual.