Download Student name - ST Social Works

Student name
Student number
Susann TRESTON
S0158048
Course code
SOCL19072
Assignment
Assessment 2 : Essay
Topic
What is the normative or structural
functionalist theory of deviance?
In what ways do critical perspectives
differ from the normative concepts of
deviance? Use examples to elaborate
your answer.
Word Count
2025 words
Lecturer
Aminul Faraizi
Due date
8 May 2012
Introduction
Deviance refers to behaviour, attitudes and beliefs which break societal norms, rules, ethics
and expectations. Biological, psychological and positivist accounts have viewed deviance as
attributable to the individual. However in contrast, sociologists challenge these distinctions
and consider deviance as an aspect of social situations and structures, highlighting rule
breaking, making, enforcing and transmitting processes. According to Lee (2006, p. 53) and
Holstein (2009), there is no fixed definitional agreement concerning deviance, as meaning
and social reactions are responsive to ‘context, biography and purpose’. The following essay
discusses the normative or structural-functionalist theory of deviance and the ways critical
perspectives differ from a normative view. Firstly an overview of theories of deviance is
discussed, followed by an outlining of normative and critical perspectives and the main
sociological tenets to each theory. Finally, the contrasting principles of each theory are
compared with reference to examples from two arenas of perceived deviant behaviour,
appearance issues and mental health.
Overview of Theories of Deviance
Central to the concerns of sociological theory has been the study of deviance. Structural
functionalism theorists argued that societies could be viewed as having organic properties
through which constituent, interdependent parts were bound to the larger whole (Scott 2006).
These parts, for example, the institutions of production, human relations and education can be
viewed in terms of their interrelationships and contribution to society (Downes 1988).
Symbolic Interaction theorists are concerned with the interaction of individuals and their
construction of meaning which defines situations and allows particular actions (Scott 2006).
Society is viewed as the product of the everyday interaction of individuals and whilst
embracing the idea of consensus, as the social construction of symbols varies between
groups, the theoretical perspective also acknowledges variation and conflict (Anderson 2009,
Bridges & Scott 2011). During the 1970’s another perspective emerged which mounted an
attack on the functionalist consensus theories and the interactionist labelling approaches. The
main point of dispute was over the subjective and pluralist conception of power and social
structure.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 2 of 8
SOCL19072
The perspective emphasised the repressive use of force and coercive social control which
they linked to class domination , rejecting sociological definitions of deviance, instead
focusing on forms of political and social conflict, revolution and protest, class struggle and
capitalist systems (Edwards 1988). Unlike the two prior paradigms which incorporate
consensus, social-conflict theories or critical perspectives, view society as an arena of
inequality and conflict (Anderson 2009). Critical theorists are oriented to an interest in
emancipation from power and domination in social interactions towards mapping structures
of power, interconnections with the State and its control apparatus (Lee 2006).
Normative theories
Normative theories conceptualise deviance as all behaviour breaking norms such as laws,
rules, regulations, standards and unspoken expectations or obligations (Roach Anleu 2006).
Lawson and Heaton (1999) observe a useful distinction between legal and illegal deviance;
illegal deviance (crime) contravenes the law, whereas legal deviance breaks norms or
standards. Norms reflect a level of general agreement between most members of the social
system (Stolley 2005).
The structural-functional paradigm adopts a macro view of society as a complex system
whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability, conditions under which
humans are believed to thrive (Anderson 2009). Downes (1988) observes that changes in one
institution imply change in another, without being necessarily reciprocal. Morality, values
and conformity to norms are seen as necessary to smooth societal functioning. Consensus and
conformity ensure solidarity and stability and are challenged by conflict and deviation. Thus,
while some deviation can be expected as societies grow and become more complex, too much
conflict hinders solidarity and throws society into a state of chaos. Structural-functionalists
maintain that social dysfunction fosters alienation or anomie, which can become a motivator
for conflict, deviance and chaos (Anderson 2009, Stolley 2005).
Traditionally, sociology has viewed deviance as an opposition to societal consensus on
proper behaviour and thought. Durkheim (1973) views complexity in the relationship
between crime, deviance and difference; which he states are ‘degrees of divergence’ from
social norms.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 3 of 8
SOCL19072
Where crime attracts legal censure, deviance tends to attract social disapproval and difference
can be explained as part of human diversity; Durkheim contends that deviance falls
somewhere between crime and difference, where deviant individuals live at the perimeter of
‘normal’ society without always attracting legal sanctions. Crime and deviance are therefore
unavoidable consequences of the range of individual differences existing in any society
(Lawson & Heaton 1999, cited p. 3). Anomie, a state of no norms, is the consequence of a
breakdown in cultural regulation and institutional structure and socialisation into the new
norms (Scott 2006).
Robert Merton explored this further by distinguishing a number of forms anomie can take;
the view that he gave the greatest attention to was where there is a cultural disjunction
between the promoted goals and culturally approved means people are expected to follow in
to achieve these goals. Merton stressed socially induced strains and deviant adaption, leading
to an incomplete socialisation of individuals to normative standards. Conformity is less
likely as individuals lack commitment to cultural standards and are likely to be swayed by
self- interest. Anomie is most likely when available opportunity structures make it impossible
to achieve ends through legitimate means (Scott 2006).
However, criticisms of the Functionalist perspective include the theory fails to specify why
one type of deviance is chosen over another; tends to promote holism; ignores non-material
and economic crimes and relies heavily on official statistics whilst providing little empirical
evidence. In comparison to critical perspectives, structural functionalist theoretical
perspectives ignore laws serving powerful interests, ignore hierarchies of power and fail to
observe who makes the laws and who benefits from the laws made (Downes & Rock 2003,
Moore 1997, Black & Reiss 1969).
Critical Perspectives
According to Tepperman (2010), conflict theories first came to be known as critical
criminology and since the 1970’s theory development has embraced Feminist, Post-Modern,
Marxist and Weberian approaches. From Marx, conflict arises from an exploitive capitalist
class structure. The ruling class make laws to dominate workers and in response, subordinate
classes develop strategies of resistance. A lack of commitment to the prevailing social order
by workers and the unemployed reduces effectiveness of laws and enforcement that control
social behaviour.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 4 of 8
SOCL19072
Marx recognised the importance of dominant ideology in justifying prevailing inequalities.
He surmised that for subordinate groups to rise against oppression they would need to
achieve class consciousness and develop an awareness of capacity to create social change.
Weber viewed conflict as arising from horizontal relations of difference between status
structures in which competing groups capture and protect resources. Conflict develops
between groups who have differing goals and social characteristics, such as wealth, gender or
relationship to power. Conflict theorists question who benefits and who loses from the
existing social order and look for particular groups that will obtain most benefit and have the
power to do so. Tepperman (2010) views making and enforcing laws as an ideological and
political activity which serves to legitimise the prevailing inequalities. Rule breaking can
therefore be seen as resistance, protest or rebellion against those in power or as symbolic, to
increase social status or lash out at an unfair society. Critical perspectives are about unequal
wealth and power distribution and the ways that people respond to inequality by breaking
rules, the social and political factors contributing to crime. It views conflict arising between
norms and the groups holding those norms.
However, criticisms of the critical perspective include the theory is based on a specific
ideology which focuses on class excluding gender, ethnicity and community; ignores
individual motivation, values, perceptions and explanations for actions; focuses on street
crime at the expense of other crimes and ignores victims of crime (Downes & Rock 2003,
Moore 1997). The key concerns for functionalists are consensus and cohesion, they view
socialisation and formal laws are necessary for social organisation. In contrast, conflict
theorists view change and inequality as central tenets and argue that social constructs work to
preserve dominant ideologies of deviant behaviours; therefore formal laws work to oppress
society rather than improve it (Tepperman 2010).
Appearance Issues
From a functionalist perspective bodily beauty as a cultural goal presents a strong risk of
anomie as beauty is an innate physical feature which limits the degree to which individuals
can approximate the ideal appearance. Those who cannot, may reject the cultural goals and
may join a group which substitutes different obtainable norms of dress and appearance,
giving members self-esteem, identity and an alternative social life.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 5 of 8
SOCL19072
Learning and practicing the appearance/behaviour code is a way of entry into the sub-culture
and maintains group cohesion. Appearance deviance acts as a visible boundary signalling
what is acceptable in a community, also strengthening social cohesion by uniting those who
do not violate norms.
Conflict theories propose that competing value systems result in deviance. Unequal power
relations determine who declares what is normal and abnormal, propelling those with less
power to challenge institutionalised norms. Those who make a living from capitalising on
others inadequacies benefit from promoting strong appearance norms, such as the fashion,
diet, mass media and advertising industry. Our consumerist society makes it easy for such
experts to sell their products and create profits. Feminists view appearance industries as
encouraging impossible ideals for women, who are required to optimise physical beauty to
dominate or escape domination by men. When these goals are unachieved, men’s power over
women is strengthened. The male gaze invites a competition for physical perfection,
however, alternative cultures are one way females could resist the socially imposed
expectations of femininity (Tepperman 2010).
Mental Health Issues
Durkheim, a functionalist, viewed suicide as arising from two social structurally induced
conditions, inadequacy in moral control and social connectedness. In time, Durkheim’s ideas
produced the social disorganisation and the ecological; approach that dominated the Chicago
School. Modern urban life produced rapid change, disrupted relationships and caused social
isolation which caused anomie and egoism and led to deviance including mental illness and
suicide. As conditions are intensified in cities it is unsure whether the cause is stressful city
life or a convergence to cities where more support or anonymity can be found (Tepperman
2010).
Conflict theorists view mental health as reflection on the unequal distribution of social
stresses, vulnerabilities and disadvantages in society. They find higher than average mental
illness rates amongst the poorer, most vulnerable members of society as these suffer greatest
deprivation of supportive family relationships, living and work conditions and health
services.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 6 of 8
SOCL19072
Neighbourhood characteristics play a part; however conflict theorists focus on social
deprivation not social disorganisation and note that socially deprived neighbourhoods
experience higher rates of mental illness. From a Postmodern perspective, contemporary
views see mental illness as an ideological product reflecting cultural assumptions and
satisfying institutional interests. Tepperman (2010) states that symptoms are not direct
indicators of dysfunction; instead suggest underlying vulnerabilities framed to match current
understandings of mental illness cause and form. In short, educated guesses about the
boundary between normal and abnormal.
Conclusion
Sociological ideas about deviance have demonstrated a lack of consensus on causes and
definitions. Different theories are useful to explain certain deviant activities or analyse social
responses to deviance. According to Roach Anleu (2006), all theorists agree that deviance is a
‘social product’ and that norms and deviance only exist if applied or constructed. However,
disagreement occurs over whether the focus should be on the individual breaking the norm,
social control mechanisms or the defining of activities as deviant. Normative theorists
examine the factors motivating individuals to break norms, such as a disjunction between
culturally defined goals and legitimate means. Critical perspectives argue that laws reflect the
values and interests of the powerful and rather than maintaining social order, are conflicting
and repressive. The notion of consensus is an attempt by the powerful to impose their own
value system on the diversity of societal groups and is achieved by control over major
ideological apparatus such as mass media and the education system, and control and use of
repressive apparatus such as the police and judicial system (Young 1988).
According to Young (1988, p. 9) , ‘Consensus is a human construct, a system of values
created by a specific group of people, but it is presented as if it were something outside and
above human creation’.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 7 of 8
SOCL19072
References
Anderson, T 2009, ‘Sociological theories of drug abuse’, University of Delaware, viewed 15
March 2012, http://www.udel.edu/soc/tammya/pdf/crju369_theory.pdf
Black, J & Reiss, A 1969, ‘Police control of juveniles’, Working Papers of the Centre for
Research on Social Organization, Department of Sociology University of Michigan, viewed
April 24 2012, http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/50831/1/47.pdf
Bridges, G & Scott, A 2011, ‘Deviance theories’, in F Borgatta & R Montgomery (eds),
Encyclopedia of sociology, viewed April 24 2012,
http://edu.learnsoc.org/Chapters/3%20theories%20of%20sociology/6%20deviance%20theori
es.htm
Downes, D & Rock, P 2003, Summary of Theoretical Perspectives, case notes,
CQUniversity e-Courses SOCL19072 Criminality, Deviance and Social Control, http://ecourses.cqu.edu.au/
Downes, D 1988, Understanding deviance, pp. 75-93, in Central Queensland University
(CQU) 2012, SOCL19072 Criminality, Deviance and Social Control: resource materials,
CQU, Rockhampton.
Edwards, A 1988, Regulation and repression, Allen and Unwin, North Sydney.
Holstein, J 2009, ‘Defining deviance: John Kitsuse’s modest agenda’, American Sociologist,
vol. 30, pp. 51-60 (online Ebscohost).
Lawson, T & Heaton, T 1999, Crime and deviance, MacMillan Press, Hampshire.
Lee, M 2006, ‘Deviance’, in J Scott (ed), Sociology: key concepts, Routledge, London.
Moore, S 1997, Summary of Theoretical Perspectives, case notes, CQUniversity e-Courses
SOCL19072 Criminality, Deviance and Social Control, http://e-courses.cqu.edu.au/
Roach Anleu, S 2006, Deviance, conformity and control, 4th ed, Pearson Education
Australia, Frenchs Forrest.
Scott, J 2006, Sociology: key concepts, Routledge, London.
Stolley, K 2005, ‘Structural functionalism’, in The basics of sociology, Greenwood Press,
Westport, viewed 24 April 2012,
http://edu.learnsoc.org/Chapters/3%20theories%20of%20sociology/16%20structural%20func
tionalism.htm
Tepperman, L 2010, Deviance, crime, and control, 2nd ed, Oxford University Press, Ontario.
Young, J 1988, ‘Deviance and drugs: absolutism, relativism and realism’, in P Worsley (ed),
The new introductory sociology, Penguin, London.
Susann Treston
S0158048
Page 8 of 8
SOCL19072