Not All Deviant Acts Are Criminal
Deviance affirms cultural values and norms, it also clarifies moral boundaries, promotes social unity and provides jobs to control deviance. Deviant behaviour is contextual in nature in that cultural differences make it very problematic to define deviance. One may ask this question on deviance, are humans genetically predisposed at birth with the characteristics that make them act deviantly, or do the people around them influence them to act this way. This writer seeks to expound on the fact that deviance is not only criminal and will also highlight the causes and circumstances where individuals end up exhibiting deviant behaviour.
Deviance is defined by Haralambos (2006) as acts which do not conform to the norms and values of a particular society. Norms are the rules or standards of behaviour defined by the shared expectations of a group of people. Similarly, Ezewu (1985) defines deviance as non- conformity to the standards of behaviour of a group or society. Since deviance culturally defined, it is not prescribed in parliament and therefore is not a universal phenomenon but rather a contextual phenomenon. One would need to understand the norms and values of a particular culture before labelling anyone deviant.
Deviance can be viewed in different angels depending on which cultural binoculars you are using as well as the sociological perspective being applied. Different sociological perspectives view deviance in a different manner. From a Marxist point of view, the important questions which require attention are who makes the law, who breaks the law and who gets caught or labelled deviant. Snider (1993) argues that deviance as exhibited through crime is more damaging and severe at corporate level rather than street crime. Corporate crime costs more that street crime. Statistics however, show that most corporate crime goes unpunished and this means that the upper class or bourgeoisie get away with crime whilst those in the lower class are sent to
Deviance is defined by Haralambos (2006) as acts which do not conform to the norms and values of a particular society. Norms are the rules or standards of behaviour defined by the shared expectations of a group of people. Similarly, Ezewu (1985) defines deviance as non- conformity to the standards of behaviour of a group or society. Since deviance culturally defined, it is not prescribed in parliament and therefore is not a universal phenomenon but rather a contextual phenomenon. One would need to understand the norms and values of a particular culture before labelling anyone deviant.
Deviance can be viewed in different angels depending on which cultural binoculars you are using as well as the sociological perspective being applied. Different sociological perspectives view deviance in a different manner. From a Marxist point of view, the important questions which require attention are who makes the law, who breaks the law and who gets caught or labelled deviant. Snider (1993) argues that deviance as exhibited through crime is more damaging and severe at corporate level rather than street crime. Corporate crime costs more that street crime. Statistics however, show that most corporate crime goes unpunished and this means that the upper class or bourgeoisie get away with crime whilst those in the lower class are sent to
References: 1. Haralambos, M, Frances S, O’Gorman J and Heald R (1986), Sociology A New Approach. Lancs, Causeway Press Limited. 2. Ezewu, E (1983), Sociology of Education. London and Lagos, Longman Group Limited. 3. Haralambos, M and Holborn, M (2008), Sociology Themes and Perspectives. London, Harper Collins Publishers. 4. Brinkerhoff, D B and Lynn K White (1984), Sociology, Wadsworth Publishing Company 5. Giddens, A. (2001.) Sociology, 4th Edition, Cambridge, Polity Press