Social Labeling Paper

“Deviancy is not a quality of the act a person commits but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an ‘offender’. Deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label.”

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.

"Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders-deviance is not a quality of the act of a person commits, but rather a consequences of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an 'offender' The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied. Deviant behaviour is behaviour that people so label."

Schur (1980, 1984) who “described labeling as a social construction of culture, which means that it is artificially defined by society. This indicates that proper concepts will be destitute in the face of ever-changing eccentricity of social standards” (Hashem, 2015:121). Society dictates what is and what is not considered “deviant” behavior, and treats the person accordingly (whether positive or negative. Labeling tends to lead to stigmatization. Noelle Vance wrote in her article titled Labeling Theory that “When relationships with parents, teachers, or friends are weakened as a result of formal stigmatization, individuals are more likely to seek affiliation with criminal

Labeling theory holds that individuals come to identify and act as per their labels. The major tenet of this theory is that the behavior and self-identity of individuals is affected by the way they are described by other people (Vold, Bernard, Snipes, & Gerould, 2016). According to this theory, the act of deviance is not implicit in a particular act, but is hedged on the inclination of the majority to ascribe labels to minorities in society who deviate from standard behavior. Labeling leads to dramatization of a particular act – which propagates the behavioral clash between the individual and the community. Through ascribing labels, the individuals acquire a negative self-image. The individuals accept themselves as labeled by the

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.

Whether we choose to admit it or remain completely oblivious, our world is composed of social norms that govern our everyday actions. Everything from brushing our teeth to wearing appropriate clothing in public is predetermined and dictated by society. Violation of these established rules inevitably earn an individual a label of “weird,” “abnormal” or “deviant.” The concept of deviance as been debunked by a plethora of scholars—many of whom have adopted an anthropological perspective on the issue. Collectively, their theories and arguments portray the intricacy of the deviant phenomenon and its embedment within

Once a person is labelled as a deviant, it is hard to remove that label. The Labeling Theory basically says that no behavior is deeply rooted on its own. It is society’s reaction to the behavior that makes the act deviant or not. Labeling is to give someone or something to a category and is usually given mistakenly. The people who usually doing the labeling have statues, numbers, power and authority. People with low status, power and authority are the ones that are being labeled.

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).

Another aspect of constructing identity can be applied to the concept of deviance, symbolic interactionist refer to deviance using the labeling theory, which refers to the meanings that stem from labels, symbols, actions, and reactions that people have toward one another. This theory states that behaviors are only deviant if and when society labels them as deviant. This being the case, members of society that have conformed to what is considered non-deviant behavior, (normal behavior) then interpret behaviors that go against social norms as deviant and as such, attach the label of deviant onto those individuals (Hewitt, 2007). The concept of deviance fits right into the SCT because the individuals that are labeled deviant have in some way shape or form constructed the deviant identity that warrants such a label.

The focus of this paper will be on two contemporary criminological theories and their application to the crime film, Eastern Promises. The two theories to be discussed, and subsequently applied to the film, are labelling theory and differential association theory. Labelling theory falls under the symbolic interactionist approach, and the primary level of analysis of this theory is micro, as it tends to focus on the effect of labels on an individual’s sense of “self”. The basis of labelling theory is that no act is inherently deviant; it is only when the act is labelled deviant that it becomes so. When someone is labelled as deviant, they begin to see themselves as the label they have been assigned. This can cause the behaviour to happen more frequently, as the individual who has been labelled begins to see themselves as they label they have been given. A criticism of labelling theory is that it lacks empirical validity, and is deterministic. There is no way to effectively test this theory, so there is no way to know for sure how accurate the concept of labelling is and the effect it has on an individual and their propensity towards criminality. This and other aspects of labelling theory will be broken down and discussed later on in the paper.

When this label is attached and internalized the individual’s actions will become influenced by the label and further deviance can be produced as a result as the individual is going to think that it is expected of them. It is also possible that when these labels are attached and internalized that these deviants will be pushed to the outskirts of society and it is here that they may begin to associate with others who may have similar

The labeling theory, an example of constructivist perspective is the theory put forth to define how deviance is experienced and why people continue to be deviant. The labeling theory was developed by a group of sociologists in the 1960’s. It is a version of symbolic interactionism defining deviance as a collective action involving the acts of more than one person, and the

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 described as being behaviour that is not part of the norms in your particular society. This can be different throughout the world because some cultures have very different norms (Stephens and Leach, 1998:17). Most deviant behaviour will attract disapproval from others in the society or punishment from authorities. There are many different types of deviance such as addiction, mental illness, alcoholism, criminality and homosexuality. Throughout this essay six types of theories will be discussed about how and why people are deviant. Four of these theories support the idea of deviance being biological and three support the idea of it being caused by your social construction. Also the essay will talk about the differences between