* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Student name - ST Social Works
Index of sociology articles wikipedia , lookup
Development theory wikipedia , lookup
Social contract wikipedia , lookup
Differentiation (sociology) wikipedia , lookup
Social rule system theory wikipedia , lookup
Social network wikipedia , lookup
Social constructionism wikipedia , lookup
Symbolic interactionism wikipedia , lookup
History of sociology wikipedia , lookup
Social Darwinism wikipedia , lookup
Social development theory wikipedia , lookup
Social exclusion wikipedia , lookup
Frankfurt School wikipedia , lookup
Sociology of culture wikipedia , lookup
Sociology of knowledge wikipedia , lookup
Labeling theory wikipedia , lookup
Social group wikipedia , lookup
Postdevelopment theory wikipedia , lookup
Sociological theory wikipedia , lookup
Sociology of terrorism wikipedia , lookup
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