Download Introduction of Deviance and more Study Guides, Projects, Research Sociology of Deviance in PDF only on Docsity!
2 Founded in 1972, the Fremont Fair is one of Seattle’s most beloved neighborhood street festivals, featuring a weekend of eclectic activities that celebrate the quirky community of Fremont, the self- proclaimed ‘center of the universe.’ Held annually in mid-June to coincide with the Summer Solstice, the event draws more than 100,000 people to shop, eat, drink, mingle, groove, and enjoy all man - ners of creative expression. Artistic highlights include craft and art booths, street performers, local bands, wacky decorated art cars, the free-spirited Solstice Parade produced by the Fremont Arts Council, and many other oddities that personify Fremont’s official motto “Delibertus Quirkus”— Freedom to be Peculiar. —Fremont Fair (2010) The Fremont Arts Council (FAC) is a community-based celebration arts organization. We value volun- teer-ism; community participation; artistic expression; and the sharing of arts skills. The Fremont Solstice Parade is the defining event of the FAC. We celebrate the longest day of the year through profound street theater, public spectacle, and a kaleidoscope of joyous human expressions. We welcome the participation of everyone regardless of who they are, or what they think or believe. However, the FAC reserves the right to control the content presented in the Fremont Solstice Parade. The rules of the Fremont Solstice Parade, which make this event distinct from other types of parades, are:
- • No written or printed words or logos
- • No animals (except guide dogs and service animals)
- • No motorized vehicles (except wheelchairs)
- • No real weapons or fire —Fremont Arts Council (2010)
CHAPTER 1
Introduction to Deviance Introduction to Deviance
Chapter 1 Introduction to Deviance 3
Introduction
You might expect that a book about deviance would start with a definition of what deviance is. But, like all things worth studying, a simple definition does not exist. For example, in the stories above, the public display of nudity is not only welcomed but also celebrated by 6-year-olds and grandmothers alike in one instance, It is true that a parade with no logos, animals, or motorized vehicles is different from most parades that we experience in the United States. But one more thing sets the Fremont Solstice Parade apart from other parades—the public displays of nudity. Every year at the parade, there is a contingent of nude, body-painted bicyclists (both men and women) who ride through the streets of Fremont as part of the parade. Rain or shine (and let’s face it, in June in Seattle, there can be a lot of rain), a large group of naked adults cycle down the street as the crowds cheer and wave. The Fremont City Council estimates that more than 100,000 people visit the weekend fair, and pictures show that the streets are crowded with parade watchers, from the very young to elderly. Contrast this event to the following story of a flasher in San Diego County. Between the summer of 2009 and the summer of 2010, there were numerous reports of an adult man flashing hikers and run- ners on Mission Trails near Lake Murphy in San Diego. An undercover operation was set in motion to catch this flasher, and on July 19, 2010, an adult man was apprehended while flashing an undercover officer who was posing as a jogger in the park. He was held on $50,000 bail while waiting for arraign- ment (KFMB-News 8, 2010). While both these events center around public displays of nudity, one is celebrated while the other is vilified. Why? ▲ Photo 1.1 & 1.2 When is a public display of nudity considered deviant? When is it celebrated?
Chapter 1 Introduction to Deviance 5 (beliefs or attitudes) are not deviant. Most of us would agree that killing someone and making it look like he or she simply skipped the country is deviant; however, there may be no reaction. A third conception of deviance that has not been advanced in many textbooks (for an exception, see DeKeserdy, Ellis, &Alvi, 2005) is a critical definition of deviance (Jensen, 2007). Those working from a critical conception of deviance argue that the normative understanding of deviance is established by those in power to maintain and enhance their power. It suggests that explorations of deviance have focused on a white, male, middle- to upper-class understanding of society that implies that people of color, women, and the working poor are by definition deviant. Instead of focusing on individual types of deviance, this conception critiques the social system that exists that creates such norms in the first place. This too is a useful approach, but frankly, there are many things that the vast majority of society agree are immoral, unethical, and deviant and should be illegal and that the system actually serves to protect our interests. Given that each of these conceptualizations is useful but problematic, we do not adhere to a single conception of deviance in this book because the theories of deviance do not adhere to a single concep- tion. You will see that several of our theories assume a normative conception, while several assume a social constructionist or critical conception. As you explore each of these theories, think about what the conception of deviance and theoretical perspective mean for the questions we ask and answer about deviance.
HOW DO YOU DEFINE DEVIANCE?
As Justice Stewart of the Supreme Court once famously wrote about trying to define obscene materials, “I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it” ( Jacobellis v. Ohio, 1964). Those who do not study deviance for a living probably find themselves in the same boat; it may be hard to write a definition, but how hard could it be to “know it when we see it”? Choose some place busy to sit and observe human behavior for one hour. Write down all the behaviors that you observe during that hour. Do you consider any of these behaviors to be deviant? Which conception of deviance are you using when you define each as deviant? Might there be some instances (e.g., places or times) when that behavior you consider to be nondeviant right now might become deviant? Finally, bring your list of behaviors to class. In pairs, share your list of behaviors and your definitions of deviant behaviors with your partner. Do you agree on your categorization? Why or why not?
The Sociological Imagination
Those of us who are sociologists can probably remember the first time we were introduced to the concept of the sociological imagination. Mills argues that the only way to truly understand the experiences of the individual is to first understand the societal, institutional, and historical conditions that individual is living
6 PART I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF DEVIANCE AND SOCIAL CONTROL under. In other words, Mills believes that no man, woman, or child is an island. Below is an excerpt from C. Wright Mills’s (1959/2000) profound book, The Sociological Imagination (Oxford University Press): Men do not usually define the troubles they endure in terms of historical change and institu- tional contradiction. The well-being they enjoy, they do not usually impute to the big ups and downs of the societies in which they live. Seldom aware of the intricate connection between the patterns of their own lives and the course of world history, ordinary men do not usually know what this connection means for the kinds of men they are becoming and for the kinds of history-making in which they might take part. They do not possess the quality of mind essen- tial to grasp the interplay of man and society, of biography and history, of self and world. They cannot cope with their personal troubles in such ways as to control the structural transforma- tions that usually lie behind them. The sociological imagination enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of indi- viduals. It enables him to take into account how individuals, in the welter of their daily experi- ence, often become falsely conscious of their social positions. With that welter, the framework of modern society is sought, and within that framework the psychologies of a variety of men and women are formulated. By such means the personal uneasiness of individuals is focused upon explicit troubles and the indifference of publics is transformed into involvement with public issues. The first fruit of this imagination—and the first lesson of the social science that embodies it—is the idea that the individual can understand his own experience and gauge his own fate only by locating himself within his period, that he can know his own chances in life only by becoming aware of those of all individuals in his circumstances. In many ways it is a terrible lesson; in many ways a magnificent one. In these terms, consider unemployment. When, in a city of 100,000, only one man is unem- ployed, that is his personal trouble, and for its relief we properly look to the character of the man, his skills, and his immediate opportunities. But when in a nation of 50 million employees, 15 mil- lion men are unemployed, that is an issue, and we may not hope to find its solution within the range of opportunities open to any one individual. The very structure of opportunities has col- lapsed. Both the correct statement of the problem and the range of possible solutions require us to consider the economic and political institutions of the society, and not merely the personal situa- tion and character of a scatter of individuals. What we experience in various and specific milieux, I have noted, is often caused by structural changes. Accordingly, to understand the changes of many personal milieux we are required to look beyond them. And the number and variety of such structural changes increase as the institutions within connected with one another. To be aware of the idea of social structure and to use it with sensibility is to be capable of tracing such linkages among a great variety of milieu. To be able to do this is to possess the sociological imagination. (pp. 3–11) One of our favorite examples of the sociological imagination in action is the “salad bar” example. In the United States, one of the persistent philosophies is that of individualism and personal responsibility. Under this philosophy, individuals are assumed to be solely responsible for their successes and failures. This phi- losophy relies heavily on the notion that individuals are rational actors who weigh the cost and benefit of
8 PART I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF DEVIANCE AND SOCIAL CONTROL
The Importance of Theory
The three of us (the authors of this book) have spent many hours discussing the importance of theory as we wrote this book. Why did we choose to write a textbook about deviance with theory as the central theme? Many of you may also be asking this question and worrying that a book about theory may suck (Continued) uniforms or speak and teach the various languages from the show, one has considered surgery to alter the shape of his ears, and some have legally changed their names and incorporated Star Trek into their businesses and workplaces. The movie documents their fandom and experiences navigating these consuming obsessions while in mainstream society. American Beauty —the story of a suburban family that, from the outside, appears to be “perfect.” However, the characters are leading far from perfect lives filled with depression, lies, drug dealing, homophobia, and self-loathing. Crumb— a movie about the cartoonist Robert Crumb, who was a pioneer of the underground comix. This movie offers a dark portrait of an artist besieged with personal and family demons. Usual Suspects— a story of five men who are brought in for questioning for a crime they did not commit. While being held on suspicion of that crime, they agree to work together on another crime. They soon realize they are being set up by someone they had wronged in the past. Television Reality television and The Learning Channel (TLC), in particular, feature a number of programs offering an inside view of people perceived as deviant or different in some way and showing how they deal with stigma from various sources: Sister Wives —inside the world of a polygamist marriage: This reality show introduces viewers to a man, his four wives, and 16 children. His motto: “Love should be multiplied, not divided.” Seinfeld —a situation comedy that is simply masterful at focusing on small behaviors or characteristics that break norms and are perceived as deviant. Episodes on the close-talker, the low-talker, the high- talker, for example, all illustrate unwritten norms on interpersonal communication. In each of the chapters that follow, we will offer suggestions of one or more films or television shows for you to watch from the theoretical perspective outlined in the chapter. We think you’ll soon agree: Deviance is all around us.
Chapter 1 Introduction to Deviance 9 the life right out of a discussion about devi- ance. Really, who wants to be thinking about theory when we could be talking about “nuts, sluts, and preverts” (Liazos, 1972)? But, this is precisely why we must make theory cen- tral to any discussion of deviance—because theory helps us systematically think about deviance. If it weren’t for theory, classes about deviance would be akin to watching Jersey Shore (MTV) or the Real Housewives of New Jersey (Bravo) (why is New Jersey so popular for these shows?)—it may be enter- taining, but we have no clearer understand- ing of the “real” people of New Jersey when we are done watching. Theory is what turns anecdotes about human behavior into a systematic under- standing of societal behavior. It does this by playing an intricate part in research and the scientific method. The scientific method is a systematic procedure that helps safeguard against researcher bias and the power of anecdotes by following several simple steps. First, a researcher starts with a research question. If the researcher is engaging in deductive research, this question comes from a theoretical perspective. This theory and research question help the researcher create hypotheses (testable statements) about a phenomenon being studied. Once the researcher has created hypotheses, she collects her data to test these hypotheses. We discuss data and data collection methods for deviance research in detail in Chap- ter 3. She then analyzes these data, interprets her findings, and concludes whether or not her hypothe- ses have been supported. These findings then inform whether the theory she used helps with our understanding of the world or should be revised to take into consideration information that does not support its current model. If a researcher is engaging in inductive research, she also starts with a research question, but in the beginning, her theory may be what we call “grounded theory.” Using qualitative methods such as participant observation or in-depth interviews, the researcher would col- lect data and analyze these data looking for common themes throughout. These findings would be used to create a theory “from the ground up.” In other words, while deductive researchers would start with a theory that guides every step of their research, an inductive researcher might start with a broad theo- retical perspective, a research question, and from the systematic collection of data and rigorous analy- ses would hone that broad theoretical perspective into a more specific theory. This theory would then be tested again as the researcher continued on with her work, or others, finding this new theory to be useful and interesting, might opt to use it to inform both their deductive and inductive work. Figure 1.1 The Scientific Method Allows Us to Systematically Examine Social Phenomena Such as Deviance Hyp oth es es D ta a C lo le tc oi n iF (^) d n n i sg C( no lc su io ns ) Th eo ry Results Scientific Method
Chapter 1 Introduction to Deviance 11 more likely to have relationships with conflict). However, as we continue along the scientific method, we systematically gather data from more than just the reality stars of these two shows. We interview teachers and police officers, retired lawyers and college students. What we soon learn as we analyze these interviews is that the general public in New Jersey is really not all that tan, loud, or self-absorbed, and they speak openly and warmly about strong connections to family and friends. This research leads us to reexamine our initial theory about the characteristics of people from New Jersey and offer a new theory based on systematic analysis. This new theory then informs subsequent research on the people of New Jersey. If we did not have theory and the scientific method, our understanding of deviance would be based on wild observations and anecdotes, which may be significantly misleading and unrepresentative of the social reality. In addition to being systematic and testable (through the scientific method), theory offers solutions to the problems we study. One of the hardest knocks against the study of deviance and crime has been the historically carnival sideshow nature (Liazos, 1972) of much of the study of deviance. By focusing on indi- viduals and a certain caste of deviants (those without power), with less than systematic methods, deviance researchers were just pointing at “nuts, sluts, and preverts” and not advancing their broader understanding of the interplay of power, social structure, and behavior. Theory can focus our attention on this interplay and offer solutions beyond the individual and the deficit model. Bendle (1999) also argued that the study of deviance was in a state of crisis because researchers were no longer studying relevant problems or offering useful solutions. One of Bendle’s solutions is to push for new theories of deviant behavior. Theoretical solutions to the issue of deviance are especially important because many of our current responses to deviant behavior are erroneously based on an individualistic notion of human nature that does not take into account humans as social beings or the importance of social structure, social institutions, power, and broad societal changes for deviance and deviants.
NOW YOU... USE YOUR SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGINATION
Liazos (1972), in his article “The Poverty of the Sociology of Deviance: Nuts, Sluts, and Preverts,” argues that the sociology of deviance focuses too much attention on individual idiosyncrasies and not enough attention on structural dynamics and the deviance of the powerful. The following graph is taken from a Web page from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (part of the Department of Energy) explaining the U.S. energy consumption for 2009. Following this chart is a section taken from the Envi- ronmental Protection Agency (also a federal agency) explaining the effects of fossil fuels on climate change. Using your sociological imagination, how might you discuss the figures and text as an example of deviance? How might the relationship between the U.S. government, lobbyists, and oil companies affect the conversation around climate change? Pretend you are an oil executive: Which might be more deviant in your view, the breakdown of U.S. energy consumption or the research on climate change? Why? Now pretend that you are an oceanographer studying changes in the Gulf of Mexico or a zoologist studying polar bear migration: What might you define as deviant? Why? Would both groups define the same information as deviant? Do you consider either the breakdown of the U.S. consumption of energy or the discussion of climate change to be deviant? Why or why not? (Continued)
12 PART I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF DEVIANCE AND SOCIAL CONTROL For over the past 200 years, the burning of fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, and deforestation have caused the concentrations of heat-trapping “greenhouse gases” to increase significantly in our atmosphere. These gases prevent heat from escaping to space, somewhat like the glass pan- els of a greenhouse. Greenhouse gases are necessary to life as we know it, because they keep the planet’s surface warmer than it otherwise would be. But, as the concentrations of these gases continue to increase in the atmosphere, the Earth’s temperature is climbing above past levels. According to NOAA and NASA data, the Earth’s average surface temperature has increased by about 1.2°F to 1.4°F in the last 100 years. The eight warmest years on record (since 1850) have all occurred since 1998, with the warmest year being 2005. Most of the warming in recent decades is very likely the result of human activities. Other aspects of the climate are also changing such as rainfall patterns, snow and ice cover, and sea level. If greenhouse gases continue to increase, climate models predict that the average temperature at the Earth’s surface could increase from 3.2°F to 7.2°F above 1990 levels by the end of this century. Scientists are certain that human activities are changing the composition of the atmo- sphere, and that increasing the concentration of greenhouse gases will change the planet’s cli- mate. But they are not sure by how much it will change, at what rate it will change, or what the exact effects will be. (Environmental Protection Agency, 2011) Figure 1.2 U.S. Energy Consumption by Energy Source, 2009 Total = 94.578 Quadrillion Btu Petroleum 37% Renewable Energy 8% Nuclear Electric Power 9% Coal 21% Natural Gas 25% Total = 7.744 Quadrillion Btu Solar 1% Geothermal 5% Biomass waste 6% Wind 9% Biofuels 20% Wood 24% Hydropower 35% Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2009, Table 1.3, Primary Energy Consumption by Energy Source, 1949–2009 (August 2010). Note: Sum of components may not equal 100% due to independent rounding. (Continued)
