Law ane Society DEVIANCE ‘What Is Deviance? Professional C Organized Crime Whi Vietimless Crimes SOCIAL CONTROL Conformity and Obedience ‘Asch’s Study of Conte Milgram’s Study of Obedience Inforinal and Formal So Explaining Deviance Functionalist Perspective Collar Crime DEVIANCE AND SOCIAL CONTROL Crime Statistics International Crime Rates Use and Meaning of Crime Stati Who Commits Index Uy gender Dy age iy rage and social ess iy ante SOCIAL POLICY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE: DEBATE OVER THE DEATH PENALTY Durkheim's legacy BOXES Merton's theory of deviance 7-1 Current Research: Neutralization of Deviance Interactionist Perspective: Cultural Transmissi and Female Bodybuilders Labeling Theory 7-2 Around the World: Social Control and Crime, Conflict Theory Soviet Sie 7-3 Speaking Out: Rape Is a Wias Crime CRIME “Types of Crimeserican society, and in other societies Amerie rota indi ; wound Yen ‘and to fear being viewed as li. ; DEVIANCE \ What Is Deviance?, of a gFOUP Fely, alcoholics, peopie with tattoos, seer aie gamblers and the mentally ill would comy Gfied as deviants. Being late for clas is al be a a deviant act; the-same iste of seeing too casually for a formal wedding. On Grespas of the sociological definition, we are all Giant from time to time. Each of us violates fommon social norms in certain situations. Deviance involves the violation of group norms, which may or may not be formalized into law. I win yoke mnt ee eriminal behavior but also many aetions not sub- Jeet to prosecution, The public official who takesa bribe has defied social norms, but so has the high school student who refuses to sit in an assigned scator cuts class. Of course. deviation from norms isnot always negative, let alone criminal. A mem- ber of an exclusive social club who speaks out against its traditional policy of excluding women, Blacks, and Jews from admittance is deviating {frorm the club’s norms. So is a police officer who “blows the whistle” on corruption or brutality within the department. As we noted earlier, deviance stood only within its social context. staph of a woman or man may be: perfectly ap- Propriate in an art muscum but would be Tegarded as out of place in an elementary schoo! slisstoom, A pharmacist is expected to sell pre- Kription drugs only to people who have explicit isttuctions from medical authorities. Ifthe phar- Racist sells the same-drugs to a narcotics dealer, Sor She has committed deviant (and criminal) havior. 1 be under ‘nude photo- Standards of deviance vaty from one group (or 119 193 CHAPLUR 7 + DLVIANGL AND SOCIAL CONTROL ety Ae Winging dove at ® Working on New Years eve | Maving secon a i dt | Paying stereo loully in xy morning tou Mavingan aot dik wih estat An instruct 15 minutes sending a col i | Geuing maried after having been engaged for | only 2 few days ‘Taking 5 years oF more ta complete high sch Meee and Katich, 10 Society may re deviant snp becae of the time element involord subculture) to another. In the United States, itis {generally considered acceptable to sing along at 2 folk or rock concert, but not at the opera. Just as deviance is defined by the social situation, 30 too is it relative to time, For instance, having an alco. holic drink at 6:00 rat. is a common practice in our society, but engaging in the same behavior upon arising at 8:00 a.m. is viewed asa deviant act and as symptomatic of a drinking problem. In Table 7-1, we offer additional examples of un- timely acts that are regarded as deviant in the United States Deviance, then, is a highly relative matter. Americans may consider it strange for a person to fight a bull in an arena, before an audience of screaming fans, Yet we'are not neatly so shocked by the practice of two humans’ fighting each ether with boxing gloves in front of a similar audience Explaining Deviance Why do people violate social norms? We have seen that deviant aets are subject to both informal and formal sanctions of social control. The non conforming or disobedient person may face dis approval, loss of friends, fines, or even imprison: ‘ment. Wiry, then, does deviance occur? Early explanations for deviance identified su pernatural causes or genetic factors (such as "badAvera cone balighng yet bing remains & epee sport in he United Ste, blood” or evolutionary throwbacks to primitive ancestors). By the 1800s, there were substantial research efforts to identify biological factors that lead to deviance and especially to criminal a fy. While such veseteh as been discrete in ie erentcth coreyceoterperary tls marily by biochemists, have sought to isolate ge netic factors leading toa likelihood of certain per~ sonality traits. Although criminality (much less deviance) is hardly a personality characteristi reearchers ave focused on tas at might ead to crime, such as aggrestion. OF course, aggres- Sion an ao lead Wo sures in the cones ‘world, professional sports, or other areas of life. ‘The contemporary study of possible biological root of criminality is but one aspect ofthe larger stebilgy debate dscaned Chines 4e fener soologits reject any crops og etic root of ere and devant -The ea of current knowlege aes signee the Mic fod af reinforcing rac aden murgpnes 22st and the implications for chat of simon. tat soca ve racy drawn upon cer appronches exes deviance (Sagat and Sanches, 1998). oP AKL IWO + ORG: boi ‘ Functionalist Perspecty, nals, deviance ns istence, with posi quences for social define the limits of who see one parent scold the guste the dinner ble learn aboss ee ‘The same is true of the dine cen speeding ticket, the department ens is fired for yelling at a customer, na” student who is penalized for hess weeks overdue. 7 Durkheim's legacy Emile Duriben (2: original edition 1895) focused tis cz. vestigations mainly on criminal 2cs, > clusions have implications for a1 23 behavior. In Durkheim's view, the pom established withi nisms of socal control) help to deze == lochavior and thus contrbite 1 bef proper acts were not commited ate tioned, people might extend the n= ‘what constitutes appropriate coe, ‘Kai Erikson (1006) sated = mmaintenance function of devine 8 the Puritans of sevententvexi] 9 land. By today's standards, the tos ANIAING SOCIAL LIFE __Merton's theory of deviance A mugger and secretary do nat searra 1 deal 1 common. Yet, in fact, each is “working” 0 ob- tain money which can then be exchanged for de- sired goods. As this example illustrates, behavior that violates accepted norms (such as mugging) nay be performed with the same basic objectives in mind as those of people who pursue more con- ventional lifestyles. Using the above analysis, sociologist Robert Merton of Columbia University (1968:185-214) adapted Durkheim's notion of anomie to explain why people accept or reject the goals of a society, the socially approved means to full heir aspira tions, o both, Merton maintained that one im portant cultural goal of American society is suc- cess, measured largely in terms of money. In addition to providing this goal for Americans, our society offers specific instructions on how to pur- sue success—go to school, work hard, do not quit, take advantage of opportunities, and so forth. What happens to individuals ina society with a heavy emphasis on wealth.as a basic symbol of success? Merton reasoned that people adapt in « certain ways, either by conforming to ar by d ating from such cultural expectations. Conse- quently, he developed the anomie theory of devi. ance, which posits five basic forms of adaptation (gee Table 7-2) Conformity to social norms, the most common adaptation in Merton's typology, is the opposite of deviance. It involves acceptance of both the overall societal goal ("become affluent”) and the approved means (“work hard’) In Merton's view, there must be some consensus regarding accepted cultural goals and legitimate ineans for ataining them. Without such conieriius, societies could t only as collectives of people—rather than as unified cultures—and might fanetion in contin. ual chaos. OF course, in x society such as that of the United States, conformity is not universal. For example, the ‘means for objectives are not equaily distributed. People in the lawer social classes often identify with the same goals as those of more powerful and affluent citizens yet lack ‘equal access to quality education and training for skilled work. Even within a society, institutional. ized means for realizing objectives vary. For in- INSTITUTIONNtGED Soar MegStME Se co Move: gurowory < ‘orn | Nexdevant : Conformity + peas ‘Deviant | Ineoration : + | Ritvalsm + i Reweatim z Rebel : ns 9 indicates acepance: ~ indiaies tgpcamy 2 Feplacment wih new means and gad TSE Fea Aubert Sern’ ploy (19681 Sls than may ce, oe Jorm of adoption dst ihr te work he ie fr mates eth selued ojos” stance, itis legal to gain money through roulete or poker in Nevada, but not in neighboring Cali fornia, The other four types of behavior represented in Table 7-2 all involve some departure from con- Formity. The “innovator” accepts the goals of a society but pursues them with means regarded as improper. For example, Harry King—a profes: sional thief who specialized in safecracking for 40 Years—gave a lecture to a sociology class and was asked ithe had minded spending time in prison. King responded: | didn’t exact ike its Butt was one of the necessary things about the life I had chosen. Do you like to ‘Gome here and teach this class? I bet if the students had their wishes theyd be somewhere else, maybe ht Scaling, instead of siting in this dumpy room. {Hut they do it because it gets them something they Tint ‘The same with me. If 1 had to go to prison fam tin atime we hat was heya (Chambliss, 1972:3). cane "getting some ton’s anomie PART UNO * ORGANIZING SOCIAL Line SEER |se the Opportur y to stchieve nies POOP Cy approved avenucs, some ay derough OCR) will turn to illegitimate F ose wor Kine) easly Gard MOON. wigualst” has a ws tYPOPEY. at success and become pay sere goal OF ey to the institutional : nisk becomes a way of life fore Wo the goal of success, In di sy ‘pl ‘eement within bureaucracy in 1 displ Tslations without remembering Bn organization. Certainly this oals of 9 Ole caseworker who re a ancless Farnily because their hast ist a homeler cr district. People who gidly enforce bureaucratic ied as "ritwalists.” as described by Merton, has “retreated”) from both ave means of a society. In the and rile drug addicts and residents of Wvpically portrayed as retreatists, are ng concern about adolescents ad- ihre, Seer hel who become retreatists at an diaed 0 + eal al adaptation identi pecs people's attempis {0 gructure. The “rebel ied by Merton re- te new social s assumed to have a sense “ar from dominant means ind goals aid ofan tically different social order. tobe fre ol a revolutionary political organi Member as the Drish Republican Army (IRA) or tor pyerto Rican nationalist group Fuerzas Ar the fis de Liberacién Nacional (FALN), can be Mregorized as rebels according to Merton's model 3 ‘Merton has stressed that he was not attempting to describe five types of individuals. Rather, he offered a typology to explain the actions that peo- ple usally take. ‘Thus, leaders of organized crime syndicates will be categorized a MovAtors, since they do not pursue success through socially ap- proved means. Yet they may also attend church and send their children to medical school. Con- versely, “respectable” people may occasionally cheat on their taxes or violate traffic laws. Accord- ing to Merton, the same person will move back and forth from one mode of adaptation to an- ated that officials can blindly | Wy other, dependiny can be accout treats and beled nner d rebellion, Phe ae havior, such a il ag sain types of bee egal gambing by diadvanaged ing a8 innovators, his f ia 3 Rnovators, his formulation cri Y differences in rates, Why, lower rates of reported crime ts ? criminal behavior not sewed ses ae tive by many people faced wit > Such questions are not ea theory of deviance 1978). fa hy adversity? Such sily answered by Merton's (Cloward, 1959, Hartjen, _ Nevertheless, Merton has made a key contribu. tion to sociological understanding of deviance by pointing out that deviants (such as innovators and itualists) share a great deal with “normal,” con- forming persons. The convicted felon may hold many of the same aspirations that people with no criminal background have. Therefore, deviance can be understood as socially created behavior, rather than as the result of momentary pathologi- ccal impulses. Interactionist Perspective: Cultural Transmis- sion ‘The functionalist approaches to deviance explain why rule violation continues to exist in societies despite pressures (o conform and obey. However, functionalists do not indicate how 2 given person comes to commit a deviant act. The theory of cultural transmission draws upon the interactionist perspective to offer just such an explanatio There is no natural, innate manner in which people interact with one another. Rather, hu: mans learn how to behave in social situations— whether properly or improperly. These simple ideas are not disputed today, but this was not the case when sociologist Edwin Sutherland (1883— 1950) advanced the argument that an individual undergoes the same basic socialization process whether learning conforming or deviant acts, CHAPTER 7 + DEVIANCE AND SOGIAL CONTROLSutherland's ideas have been the dominating force in criminology. He drew upon the euftural trananistion school, which emphasizes that crii> ‘nal behavior is learned though interactions with thers, Such leatning includes not only tech: ‘niques of lawbreaking (or example, how to break ino a car quickly and quietly) but also the mo- tives, drives, and rationalizations ‘of criminals, The cultural transmission approach can also be used to explain the behavior of people who en gage in habitu id ultimately. life-threat- ening—use of alcohol or drugs. ‘Sutherland maintained that through interac- tions with a primary group and significant others, people acquire definitions of behavior that are eemed proper and improper. He used the term differential ase to describe the process through which exposure to attitudes favorable to criminal acts leads to violation of rules. Recent research suggests that this view of differential as- sociation can be applied to such noneriminal devi- ant acts as siting down during the singing of the National Anthem or lying to a spouse oF friend {E. Jackson et al, 1986). “Yo what extent will a given person engage in activity regarded as proper or improper? For each individual, it wil depend on the frequency, dura: ion, and importance of two types of social inter- action experiences—those which endorse deviant bbchssior and those which promote acceptance of social Deviant behavior, including crimi- a is selected by those who acquire more sentiments in favor of violation of norms. People ate more likey to engage in normdetying behav. ier ithe are prt group or eure it Sutherland offers the example of a boy who i sociable, outgoing, and athlete and ‘wholivee . an area with a high rate of delinquency. The youth is very likely to come inzo contact with Peers who commit acts of vandalism, fail to sted ‘hos and so forth and may, dus, adopt such she same ghborhood may stay away from his revise on range aoa Bispelehiunsrmvrante 198 the types of groups cind ps a ki in of friendships oqetish re mld Cressey, gra 3 ni, mother example, 2 he theory can be appli ball player who accepys 3 tar crue in exchange fy ibe Fecruiter’s sc} “hom ely ssl yh bets, coaches, and reer? en, fet ‘mount goals of suceyg i" 9 . the money and fame ih Consequently these yi many people who faye and relatively few why 4. accepting a recruiter's em He According to is cre, howeres transmission a behavior ofthe fae ang mabe the impoverished person wnt atYe ie sity. While not a precise anes outep through which one becomes re Of bee association docs alee saa Paramount role of social ine tn 2 etn’ maton nit ior (Cressey, 1960:53-54, matt, Sutheland and Cressey feet ‘The cultural ransmision 2 only with the proces by wight niques are learned, but alo wig jo is actually pased on trea high tom ‘Ey ie ‘engage ton hy ac ne rote ‘This content includes methods heen ‘rime a8 well s ways of using ior. The concept of “techniques of ey sen deed nb Fe anc ter norm-defying eed defined by the deviant Hi era ant deviar Mt Person to justify hiserbe. Labeling Theory ‘The Sains and ‘ete two group of high stor eae Constantly cectpied Wak dai it truancy, pety thet and sandler nee similarity ended. None of the Saints was eer tested but every Roighneck as a= rouble with pole att towne ie disput in ee treatment Ope bss participantobservation research in the hit school, William Chambliss (1973) conclude ht FART TWO + ORGANIZING SOCIAL LIFE 124verely dialed have rat sr Maiduaity inthe br = . = ing, and define them as actors in w™®8Feciproset inca. Rather than adhering yo 3 2¢h eho Bet on obvious "devan be BA hn abled accept the severely disabied dived human beings 8 val “Traditionally, research on de nose individuals who SGotrast labeling theory fares oa tion officers, psychiatrists, judges ease: POD fics shal ffl, Sth foci control. These gens, is apoyo significant role in creating the devian ese42 Siping ers pen nd ae ie coin hana rae they have the power to define labels and ag tiers Ths view eal the en eee EIphans o the socal guia geome "he labeling approach doer nec tal gn why certain people accept a label and others ac Ito rejed is applicator Ince fine may exaggerate the exe wih vin ee images canbe altered by occa judge ee Fel theorists do suggests howeiee nae eniah power it imporant in deers enon’ ably 10 rest an undeseee the Eepeting approaches Glog thes a ek Menon aed Sutherland) El w epee ane Givi continue to be viewed cules father thn as"siollry of tulet: Acorn i Foard Becher (1073179~180) abet they west conceived as thet cxpanaton fr de trex ls proponents meely hoped wo foes mere retort onthe undewiaby important soso thor peopl offically charge of deimng de ance (Das, 1978178; compare ith Elen and Caen, 1978:35-87. ional though the ah Pondit. led an via has Focus rms Confice Theory Why i certain behavior en ated 3s deviant while other bhava is m0? Ae cording to confit theorists, iti because pewpe vith power protec their own interests and dire Avance to suit their own needs For dca laws against rape reflected the oversbelnirey tale omposiion of sate leslatres. A om onsequence, the egal definition of rape et tuned only to sexual relations between Umma 20 cannot = DENN fentenp Rae er iinet eh ns en tnt fk iy masa king is often an ate myutocercebm maaan i hep exp ata int galeg tog we sg Tae hich a vinled on mastic ee, amine thee “vicinles cine lan ee ine eins Acerca cia Staub ae wheter Us and eros Th mapa een the Unied Sa re gees fa wwe yet gut ad el ed tga ano rege Se conics pepe eins he ets pedi say ioc bead reticent we neq, Te empl, raeen ne bed at Aan Aes gi sae er pone voces eH ce th Moneta A cy eae forthe i Te 2 Sel FE he Deen Joc Core pas whch cut 2 cased pecan inmates: Cabra MINS cent Ase ond be 2 oe od mre to mpi Me p scan CNTR. ‘ ce subject of this chapter is knaver Trager. cheating, unfalraess, tin see malingering, cutting ‘corners, sscakinity, dishonesty, betrayal, graft, cor- Wy kedness, and sin—in short, de- ‘iihen we say that someone is de- t= do not simply mean that he or she is viant we different.” We mean that he or she "odd or of violating a norm. Deviance is is guilll sre, for all societies (large ones like eveyMpic of France ot small ones like the Rep yhave cules, and where there are eu ere is deviance, Ik may be a matter of ral gon your income tax or on your wife, ceterpect tothe flag, oF of not taking out Getash when's your turns | Myny do so many people insist on viola. ing rales? Or, to turn the question around, mB Maespite the obvious convenjence of wey ing les, do so many people insist on veaplying with them? Most of.us do not just gp along with morality" but, as Durkheim jointed out, “find charm in the accomplish- Pent ofa moral act prescribed by a rule that fas no other justification than that it is a ule, We feel a . . . pleasure in performing Turduty simply because it is our duty.” ‘The satisfaction of doing right has some- thing to do with the fact that it is right, even ititis difficult, dangerous, or costly. Some- times we seek out, s0 to speak, moral moun- tains to climb and exult in the strenuous task, It makes as much sense to ask, “Why should we do wrong, despite our sense of duty?” as to ask, "Why should we do right?” These are two ways of asking the same ques: tion, because if we can explain why himan_ beings behave properly we will at the same timé explain why human beings sometimes misbehave, Thus a theory of deviant behav- ior is also a theory of conformity. upto" & yjance- shether any y of useful. we some rules, how- ever arbitrary they may be. For example, if {taffic is to move along the highways itis. important whether the rule says that people must drive on th r the left than that there bea rule. However, you can't take it for granted that if you play by the rules things will go your way. You may get bored. The costs may not be worth the possible rewards. You may find that you can get what you want more quickly and easily by not following the rules. ‘There are always temptations to cut corners or otherwise violate the norm. Every rule, then, crates the posit of devian lefine deviance as any form of sro that volts the norms of socal group or of society) You will remember that norms cover'awide range—from, say, the norm requiring us to eat fried chicken with a knife and fork in a fancy restaurant to the rule forbidding murder. Not all deviance consists of breaking laws. If you spend every dollar you own and every minute of your time playing pinball machines, you will not ‘bea criminal but you will be deviant. are drunkby ten o'clock every morning, you may not be violating a law but you will be violating a strong social norm (and you won't feel very good either!). As long as any tule (or norm) is recognized as valid, how- ever informally, then breaking that rule is an act of deviance. However, the norms that people believe in most firmly are usually backed up by laws. For this reason the study of deviance is largely 2 study of serious so- cial problems, especially crime. Whatever people want—food, shelter, / Types of deviance S Sax, ‘or contract bridge—they must get through organized social patterns in which Ihe actions of, many people it together. There’ must be some understandings about “ho is supposed to do what and in what sit- Itis convenient to classify deviant behavior into four mdin categories (2) deviant behavior, (2) deviant habits, (3) deviant psyclislogies, and (4) deviant cultures, In the rest of the chapter we will deal primarily with the first two categories. DEVIANT BEHAVIOR The deviant acts about which you and Tare, quite reasonably, most concerned are aggres- sive crimes such as murder, rape, and rob- boty. The frequency of such acis seems to be increasing throughout North America, though not at the same rate in every slate or - However, it is very hard to estimate how much crime actually occurs in society. Official police statistics may record as few as fone out of every twenty-three crimes. A po- lice officer who catches a teenage boy com- mitting a crime may decide to simply warn him and let him go without recording the crime. Throughout North America the police can use wide discretion in deciding what is to be considered a crime. Moreover, a vast number of crimes are not reported, either because the victims think it is useless to call the police or because there is no victim, Some crimes are more likely to ve deteci- ed than others: Public outrage over armed robbery or sexual assaults,ox: children pres- sures the police to be especially, active in trying to catch those who commit such crimes? but the public is less concemed about illegal gambling or false advertising. Grimes without victims are generally net detected because they are “invisible.” For example, the people involved in crimes such as drug use, homosexuality, and illegal abor. tion are willing participants and thorefore do not report the crime.* Women often do not report rape because they may be questioned about their personal lives if they do. It is cin vious, thus, that police records do not reflect the true patterns of deviance in a population We can correct for the bias in such statistics {o some extent, but we are always loft wit some doubt about the actual rate and pattern of crime in @ given population, The best estimates of crime tates are based on three kinds of information: (1) po eae lice statistics, (2) gy, ; veys ian eines ee tims, and (3) surveys many criminal acts the in. According to boi crimes and the survey {h® FB and larceny are the most : Who commits doviant actap Péople who com, call them offenders tod is deviant characters —are nan ity. Even if we limit our who, at one time or anothoatl law, most of us are offender studies to prove this point waa eth James Wallerstein and Clement yt collected 1698 questionnaires listing fenses that were serious ensegi™8¢ maximum jail sentence of not lex ye": year, Although thet sampling of i women was not fully scent ya sul therefore do not accurate {Pe Jasper population (ie, that of tee York Gity area), they do show tha thy vil tor of the law is Everynian: The Tesponde, Were asked to check each offense hare, had committed and to indicate whethere: had committed it before the age of 6.Niag nine percent of the respondents admit! one of more offenses, as shown in Table 1 (Be careful in interpreting the table, Sou, the acts listed are only technically cinis For example, fistfights might be indué under “assault.") The mean number of ¢ fenses committed in adult life was 18 men and 11 for women. The men reported mean of 3.2 juvenile offense ye wore! 1.6. It is likely that very few of them ev came to the attention of the police. Edmund Vaz interviewed midélece Canadian high school bays about their dele quentacls. (See Table 7.2.) About two-tir of the boys aged 15 tv 19 admitted that had taken little things that did not belong them, gambled for money, driven withov' license, or drunk alcoholic beverages *! the FB) devi,102 culture exists in social isolation from main culture and builds up a syste norms all its own?! of Besides countercultures, there are 2 number of other types of subcultures that are deviant to varying degrees. Street gangs, or- ganized crime, and certain religious sects have norms and beliefs that are quite differ- ent from those of the larger community. The social construction of deviance Deviance results not only from the actions of the offerider but also from the actions of conforming members of soci- ety. It is the conformers who (1) make the rules, (2) enforce them, and (3) call the of- fenders deviants. MAKING THE FS, Deviance is possible only because there arc rules to break. But rules do not just come into existence whenever they are “needed” or “wanted.” This is particularly true of laws, opposed to informal social norms. Howard Becker has shown that someone must have a strong enough interest in getting a Jaw on the books to push for its passage. He calls such people “moral entrepreneurs.” They make it their business to sew another patch onto the moral fabric of society. One kind of work that the moral entre- preneur docs is to persuade others that the proposed law will protect a recognized so- cial value. Values are general statements about what is good or desirable, but their implications for conduct in specific situa- tions are not always obvious. Someone must search for a general value that will justify the new rule. In addition, the moral enterpre- neur must defend the new rule against its opponents, who may invoke a different val- ue in support of their position, cludes publicity—the arousal Me Work jp, urgency about the proposed law, 0M of cludes neutralization of the objec! others whose interests wil be ase" 0 fected by the law. ely a. Becker illustrates this proces ing how the Marijuana Tax Aa of 1 Son, enacted. The U.S. Bureau of Narcotic, the moral entrepreneur in this cass, 1937 marijuana was not regarded as a2 us social problem, and state laws bang” were not enforced. Then the Bureau of 92" coties began to promote the idea thet mi juana was a major threat to the general ye}, fare. As a result a federal law outlawing thy use of marijuana was quickly passed 1h, Bureau's motivation for this action was of scure, though it was probably linked to the fact that the bureau had acquired a lot of prestige as a bulwark against the evils of opiate drugs, which, unlike marijuana, ate addictive. Enlargement of the Bureau's op. erations and enhancement of its reputation required the identification of new public enemies.*> , cs was Before "OT \ SENFORCING THE RULES Deviance exists partly because laws exist, and the laws may or may not be of great so- cial value. Deviance also exists partly be- cause laws are enforced, and likewise, the enforcement may or may not be of great s0- cial value. Indeed, a few sociologists argue that the police actually cause crime. They may mean this in two different senses. First, one tends to find crime where ont looks for it. According to Aaron Cicourel, the very high crime rate in the urban ghetto ca" be explained largely by the fact that police expect crime to occur there and concentrate on looking for it there, thus creating 2 ‘self- fulfilling prophecy."#* It is well known that crime is delected when and where the police are trying to detect it. Thus during a riot therate in other parts of the city usually Fos because the police are so busy Wat they cannot detect the usual erimes elsewhere. ibe od, the use of power by the police eco tead to crime. Police work in- tain amount of strain. The combi- velisnot personal danger and authority ro- nate® temptation for police afficiers to use ates uuthority in ways that are contrary to vpetrate of law. The fact thgt police can be te gerous was recognized far back in histo- isked themselves, Quis cus- ry. The Romans a sie ipsos custodes? ("Who will guard the jpardians?"), but they do not seem to have Bond a satisfactory answer to their question, North Americans have become more aware Of this problem in recent years after watch- ing incidents of police violence in civil- rights and antiwar demonstrations on TV newscasts, However, after reviewing the ret- ords of such tragic incidents in American history, Gary T. Marx has concluded that the crime drops. T atthe #0! umber of may volves acer! police have become more restrained over” time rather than less so.*7 LABELING THE 23° It is one thing to commit a deviant act— lying, stealing, homosexual intercourse, oF heavy drinking —_but it is quite another thing tobe ‘s2sie0 deviant, to be socially defined asa list, a thief, a homosexual, or a drunk, Such labels suggest that one is habitually siven to a particular kind of deviance and that he may be expected to behave in a deviant way. Fortunately, however, most ree who commit deviant acts do not have {he unpleasant experience of being labeled leviant. Indeed, we are all “hidden offend- And law of other, but few of us are labeled veant Our chance of being defined 9s de- cant depends largely on whether we are a Performing deviant acts. Crimes victims—drug abuse, homosexts le having at least technically violated, to come to newspapers. Therefore people th such acts are les likely tobe labeled evant than someone who makes a habit of sealing a police ear and tearing through town with the siren on. Milions of respected home- makers secretly drink all aiterioon while watching television. They may be alcoholics for several years before their neighbors find out and begin to refer to them as that lush.” Even crimes that get onto the public rec- ord do not necessarily result in the offend- ers’ being labeled as deviant. In 1949 Edwin Sutherland published a study of what he called “white-collar crime." This was ar analysis of crimes committed by 70 larg ‘manufacturing, mining, and other corpora- tions and their subsidiaries over an average of 45 years. The offenses studied included false advertising, violations of patent, trade- mark, and copyright laws, financial fraud. and other offenses committed by business. en in the course of their work. Most of these offenses had been detected by inde- _ pendent government commissions. and the Fecisions Sutherland recorded were all om Sets that are defined as criminal by law. A total of 960 decisions were made against the died, an average of 4 con fons each. What these offenses cost their victims in terms of money cannot be estimat, wept only a handful of cases of aud and folge advertising can cost consumers many feitfons of dollars. However, in most of Taage eases the public image ofthe Corpor Aes gvotved was not damaged and ts off tion Mrontinued to be respected citizens of core “communities, with thelt good names dtamaged by deviant reputations: corporations stu! stigma Not todo corporat Joffendess wiv 42 tacky fon executives SutherlandNot everybody minds being lobeled as de- studied. Many have to live with ruined rep- utations that are in keeping with their dis- valued roles. Of course not all disvalued roles are viewed as devriant. The roles of slave, hunchback, moron. and blind person are disvalued, but they are viewed different. ly than the roles of coward, thief, scab, or adulterer. It is assumed that no one chooses the former class of roles and that people who are forced to play such roles are “unfortu- nate" but not “reprehensible.” However, the unfortunate and the reprehensible both ex- 138 perience stigma. the mark of disgrac Attached to those in disvalued roles Erving Goffman has analyzed the of of stigma on selfimage and the ofa“ struggle of the stigmatized person to mt” tain self-respect and a reputable image 2 tha ig Redalining deviance Certain kinds of acts may “migrate fo, one deviant category to another. What war once asin" or a "vice." for example, may elevated to the gravity of a “crime” or be Feduced to mere "bad taste.” Similarly. te sinner may be redefined either as a “erin, hal” or asa “boot.” Social structure and the cultural context determine the direction i which a given act will migrate. A major ey. tural trend of the past fifty years or so has been to reclassify as “sick” certain forms of behavior that were once viewed as vicious, depraved, or criminal; homosexuality and drug use are among those behaviors.* (0f Course many people would rather be regard. ed as "bad" of “immoral” than as “mentally ill.") Homosexuals have a good chance of being redefined as neither vicious nor “sick” but simply “different,” especially since 1973, when the American Psychiatric Asso- ciation moved in that direction. Controlling deviance Socte! control-consists of the various ways in which members of « group punish deviance and try to get others to live up to society's norms. The example that comes to mind most readily is the ss tem of laws, police, courts, and prisons. but there are other sources of social contr! a well. The control of deviance is a matter of continual public concern, and we will reuro to this topic in the section on social polis. For now it is enough to mention three of the 400,main sources of social control: socialization, group pressure, and social sanctions. sectat on Most social control is self-control. As we saw in Chapter 4, we usually behave properly even if no one is looking because we have internalized the norms of our group. This is why many patterns of deviance~especially delinquency and other antisocial acts—re- galt from inadequate socialization. Poor in- terpersonal relations in the home during childhood may: have long-term effects on personality and increase the likelihood that 2 person will perform deviant acts. Thus Travis Hirschi’s 1969 study of 4000 teenage boys in the San Francisco Bay area found some correlates of delinquency that have been reported in many other such studies: (i) the boys" fathers had often been on wel- fare or unemployed; (2) their school per- formance and aspirations were low; and (3) their respect for and attachment to. parents were low." Hirschi claims that item (3) is one of the most important and common find- ings in delinquency research. Children who are close to their parents are unlikely to mis- behave, whether the parent is of high or low status. Almost all delinquents say that their upbringing was unpleasant, that their par- ents never understood them, and that their parents were too strict. Inadequate socialization in childhood may be the cause of many other patterns of deviance, such as homosexuality and emo- tional illness. However, sociologists are still trying to.find out exactly what aspect or as- pects of socialization must be lacking for these tendencies to arise. Some researchers suggest that some mental illnesses may be due to peculiar patterns of communication within the family, patterns that involve con- wadictory messages expressed in different ways. For example, a little boy's mother may Dh ies into 105 talk a lot about how much she loves him, but whenever he touches her she may stiffen, move away, or look annoyed. Which “mes sage” should he believe —the verbal one or the nonverbal one? If he calls attention to the discrepancy, his mother may get angry. This situation has been called a “double bind” and is said to be common in the families of mental patients.* s5uaz For adolescents, perhaps even more than for adults, peer group approval is extremely important. This is why so many delinquent acts are committed by gangs rather than by individuals acting alone. By the same token, peer group pressure to conform can be an important means of social control. James Coleman, who compared the adolescent cul- tures of different high schools, argues that peer group pressure is far more influential than parents’ opinions. He claims that each high school builds up a unified teenage cul- ture that may differ greatly from that found in other high schools, even though the schools are similar in socioeconomic make- up. For example, one school may be sports oriented and another intellectually oriented. ‘A teenager who~goes to the spotts-minded school is far less likely to be interested in schoolwork than one who goes to the other school, regardless of his or her parents” atti- tudes. SeciaL SANCTIONS We do not depend only on socialization and peer group pressure to maintain social order. Society also uses many different saactiany— rewards for desirable behavior and punish- ments for undesirable behavior. One can be sent to jail, for instance, or fined. Even490 The individual in societs Seaiched history for a “society of saints” to find out whether deviance occurred ata rele- vely constant rate in that society, as Dutk heim suggested. He chose the New Englan Puritans, who at least called themselves @ community of saints, and he found that to the Puritans minor acts of religious noncon- formity were crimes punishable by death. The number of deviants who were alive and active in this society remained about the same over several decades, as measured by the number of offenders brought to tial When the supply of “real” deviants began to run low, the New Englanders discovered witches in their midst, Erikson concludes that "deviance is not a property inherent in any particular kind of behavior; it is a prop- erly conferred upon that behavior by the people who come into contact with it."** The relativity of deviance The study of deviance, then, is not simply the study of drunkenness, drug use, extramarital sexual relations, pros- titution, and so forth as such, for each of these behaviors is socially acceptable in some society and in some situations. What., makes an act deviant? MORMS GOVERN ROLES Behavior is deviant only if the person who performs the act is subject to the norms that his or her behavior violotes. A person is de viant only in terms of his or her role as a member of a particular collectivity. Part of the meaning of a role in a collectivity is to be subject to the norms of that collectivity. Even people who do not belong to the collectivity and do not approve of its rules may still take its norms into account when judging its members. Thus, for example, non-Catholics may recognize the difference between a “good” Catholic and a “had” Catholic, They may even admire the "good" Catholic for his or her faithful adherence io patterns of con. duct for which they would criticize of their own religious collectivity. There are interesting bordesting tions, such ¢s that of the "guest," yh? a household or in a foreign country grt a limited sense are guests “member collectivity they are visiting. Ther ja governed by a special set of understana that may include special duties and ga privileges. Guests may be deviant, but a in terms ofthis special sot of rules. For ex? ple, it would ordinarily be deviant fora gues toreorganize your kitchen cabinets or ina squabble over the family budget," ROLE CONFLIcy Sometimes a person may have two differen, roles with contradictory norms so that itm; be difficult or impossible to conform to thes all. Conformity to one role may require des, ance from another. This situation is called role conflict. For example, the role of exeni- nation proctor and the role of friend may make quite different demands on a person; however, the system may be organized in such a way that no individual is likely to play those two roles at the same time. Role conflict is a source of deviance that is bu into the structure and rules of the system it self itis a structural source of deviance. We have said that deviance is specificto the norms of a collectivity. Sometimes, how- ever, people may not know exactly what those norms are. As agreement on the rules declines, the idea of deviance becomes less meaningful and less useful, and we may have to figure out whose version of the rules matters gt any given moment. Deviance m2 be created or ended by changes in the rules themselves or by changes in the interprel2 lion of the rules. Theories of deviance 7 The theories that we will mention. here all seck toanswer the question, How do people happen to violate norms! ed 106co approaches can be taken in answertn, Ta question. The firs assumes that fend: tai Be different from nonoffenders and tries ors fw in what way they are different and to erghey become different. We call this the how sofpeople approach because it ac. Finite for aeviance by explaining "what find of person” would do a particular thing. Psychelceists often take this ap. proach. The second approach assumes that a deviant may be just like anyone else and not detifferent “kind of person.” We call this Spproach situational because it tries to ex- pisia deviance in terms of situations that Pad ordinary people to violate norms. Most sociologists take a situational approach to the question of deviance. KINDS-OF-PEOPLE THEORIES ‘Theories that attribute deviant behaviors to particular kinds of people may account for the behavior in terms of either biological characteristics or psychological characteris- ies. Here we will discuss both biological and psychodynamic theories of criminal or delinquent behavior. 7 Alological theories . #LOMBROSIAN POSITIVISM In the 1870s an Italian physician, Cesare Lombroso, founded the “positive school of criminology"—a the- ory that explained criminal behavior as caused by a genetic defect. According to this theory, a deviant person inherited a body structure and personality that were charac- teristic of a more primitive stage of evolu- tion.* Lombroso's followers believed that they could identify “born criminals” with calipers, scales, and cameras, for all such deviants were supposed to be marked by the Physical “stigmata of degeneracy.” Early in thls century this theory was destroyed by the, Wieearch of Charles Goring, an English prison Net who compared his prisonets to a con- Deviance and control 494 evidence of a distinct phy evidance ofa distinct physical ype among SHEtoGN's cosstitutiowas trPotas other efoto link physiology and cee ogy was made by William 1, Sheldon wa ‘American psychologist and physician ™ At ter examining 200 wayward boys Sheldon concluded that boys with hard, rectangular {"'mesomorphic”) body structures were more likely to become delinquent than boys whose physiques were either soft and round or lean and fragile. Later research by Shel- don Glueck and Eleanor Glueck supported William Sheldon’s findings, though 40 per- cent of the Gluecks' delinquent subjects wore not primatily mesomorphic.” Wo still don’t know why mesomorphs are any more likely to become delinquent than skinny boys or rly-poly ones. Perhaps the most sat- isfactory explanation is that people have a tendency to do the things for which they are best equipped. Delinquent street life rewards strength and physical toughness, which are characteristic ofthe athletic mesomorph. XY% CHROMOSOMES Some researchers aze exploring the question of whether criminali- ty is connected with ebnormal chromosome patterns. Chromosomes are threads of living ‘matter that contain the genes that determine ‘our inherited characteristics —eye color, hair color, and so on. There are normally 23 pairs of chromosomes in every human cell (46 chromosomes in all). The twenty-third pair is the one that determines sex. In females, the last pair consists of two identical chro- mosomes called X chromosomes. In males this pair consists of two different chromo- somes, an X chromosome and a Y chromo- some, But some males have an extra ¥ chro- mosome, and some tesearchers think that ‘criminality occurs more often in such men than in men whose chromosomes are not- mal, This condition seems to be present at birth but not inherited. But even if there is 2crimes can possibly be due to this physical anomaly. As of now, therefore, all biologi cal theories of deviance arg/jnconclusive, though there is good reasof for continued research. Psychodynamle theorle Most kinds-of-people theories stress, not biological, but psychological characteristic ‘These theories try to account for deviance in terms of events in the life history of the'de- viant, Pethaps the deviant acquired weird motives at some point or else failed to learn tho internal controls that conformists learn. Such theories are usually based on Freudian psychoanalysis, which points to defects in the superego and the ego as well as to the frustration of needs as a source of deviant conduct. SoTH A person's cons@ence is supposed to develop out of early loving relationships with moral adults. According to Freudians, failure to devetop a strong con- science, or superego, results in a psycho- pothic personality—a character with no guilt feelings, pity, or respect for others.** Itis sometimes claimed that most of the pris oners in penitentiaries are psychopaths. However, some psychologists believe that the psychopathic personality is a rare condi- jon, and still others deny that it exists at all 5s In recent years psychoana- Iysts have paid increasing attention to ego defects. A weak ego is not lack of conscience but inability to organize one's activities in the real world. It can involve, for example, inability to control impulses, to postpone plezsure, and to follow plans. FRUSTRATION AGGRESSION A theory based on Freud's thought but best explained by John Dollard is called the frustration- cogsression theory” It holds that frustration produces aggression, which, in turn, pro- Buces deviant behavior. If the aggression is \ directed outward, the person 1 Source of his or her frustration o2 atcky, stitute target. If the person's controje™® Sh throng. the aggressive energy may yi harmless by sublimation. in thig ©” energy is used up in some socially able or constructive way—by sma squash ball around, pethaps, or hy nt a critical letter to the editor of 7% newspaper. 8 heal This theory has been used b Henry and James F. Short to account? ations in suicide rates (aggression against, self) and homicide rates (aggression pe another). They suggest that low.sac people can easily blame others, rather ts, themselves, for their frustration and te, they will feel justified in turning thee fression outward, commiting heme rather than suicide. Higher-status people ec the other hand, will be more likely o con mit suicide under stress. Available dita consistent with this theory, though there ther theories supported by equaly sty evidence.** DEFENSE MECHANISMS Psychoanalysis is the source of yet another theory. Unlike the others, which suggest that the offender laws ontrpl of his or her deviant impulse, tis theory suggests that the deviant act is 2c vice contrived by the personality to prow itself ogainst an lt. Te works by concealing from the actor his or her use ceptable impulse, and only skilled anal will bring its “true meaning” to light. To ories of this sort interpret deviant acts # mechanisms of defense. In Delinquent Boys Albert Coben ts tose such a theory to explain why lowe class youth tend to be delinquent in wt that have no utility but show a spirit of Fe meanness and negativism. Cohen af that American children of all social cist and ethnic origins must compete ogni ‘another for approval and status unde’ © same standards. They are rewarded f 108bal ability, polished manners, achievement, and sustained effort toward long-term gonls Lower-class children are the losers in this competition because their socialization ex, perionces in childhood differ from those ot middle-class children. To cope with the fes, ing of being a loser, lower-class children withdraw from the game, reject the middie class rules, and set up a new rules under which they can perf torily. But the dominant value system is also in some sense their value system, They have, te acortain extent, internalized its rules as well as their own. They can tell themselves that they don't really care what people think of them, but theif internalized values, though repressed, threaten to break through and reduce their satisfaction with the path they have chosen. To protect this choice from “the enemy within, as well as the enemy without,” they fall back on reaction forme. tion. which is, in Freudian theory, a mecha. nism for denying an unacceptable element of the personality through behavior that seems to overprotest, overdeny. They not only re. ject-the dominant value system but do so with a vengeance. They engage in malicious, spiteful, ormery behavior of all sorts to show, not only to others but to themselves as well, their contempt for the game they have reject. ed. For example, a teenager may “prove” that he does not like or want a sports car by slashing the tires of all the soy cars he game using form satisfac sees. Problems with kinds-of-people theories All kinds-of-people theories claim that the deviant act is caused by a weakness in the character of the individual. However, this model suggests that such weak people would be consistently deviant, that is, that they would always commit the same deviant ct in a given situation, But this is not the ase. Most people who commit deviant acts are not « unsistently deviant, Most students 409 ance und contrat 199 ories. Beside: itted by people who are basi. ave marked jasy- Recall Sutherland’ work on white-colla: ceaeia 8, most devi acts are commi oon cally normal chological disorders cri for example. Pillars of soci- ized personal 's psychological These acts were carri ties who do not have obviou: problems. SITUATION THEORIES In this section will describe several theories that explain deviant behavior as atising out of the properties of social systems, The frst is anomie theory as developed first by Dusk: heim and later by Merton. The second is culturaltransmission theory, especially. os developed by Sutherland. The third is role self theory, or symbolic interactionism. slskiethoory Four Durkheim believed that new problems—mainly class conflict and the decline in social solidarity—had resulted from increasing division of labor. The jobs of individual workers had become so special- ized that the workers could no longer oper- ato according to shared rules and under. slandings.* Therefore people doing different jobs worked at eross-purposes, and this led to confusion, inefficiency, and even social disintegration. There were no common rules for regulating the social system. Durkheim calied this situation anomie. meaning normn- lessness or deregulation. Any period of up- heaval or economic uncertainty, such as a depression, isa period of high anomie. In his book Suicide he suggested that periods of rapid change—especially eco- omic booms and depressions—make i impossible fur people tw exp : wards for conforming to society's normWhen society and the economy are unstable, the benefits of conforming ar deviating ace not predictable enough to count on. People may Work hard and save money for their old. age. only to have thelr savings wiped out in a stock market crash or bankruptcy. A tele phone quiz or jingle contest may, by a fuk turn a drifter into a rich man iout his making any contribution to his society. If such events occur often, they weaken a so- cial group's ability to back up its norms with atic rewards and punishments. In his discussion of “anomic suicide” Durkheim notes that suicides increase both in times of depression and in times of rapid- ly increasing prosperity. Ho believed that this is due to changing ideas about how ro- wards should be distributed among the members of a society. It is understandable that hard times might make life seem no longer worth living. But why should pros- perity produce similar results? UAccording to Dur are endlessly expandable. There is no “natu- fal Tmit To what people might crave and, therefore, to what might satisfy them. What, then, keeps us Irom being constantly dissat- syste: isfied? The norms that tell us how high to aim. Social rules, not Biology, define what each Zocial class is entitled to. People regu- late their wants accordingly, and this creates the possibility of feeling satisfied. Buta peri- dat fast-growing prosperity upsets the usu- al dehinitions of the goals that a porson-may and ive is weakened x heim a “Sunder such conditions. Suicide ts caus “Uiisslate of anomie, === Z& MERTON Four decades after the publication of Durkheim's Suicide, Robert Merton pub- lished a short paper entitled “Social Struc- ture and Anomie,” that developed Durk- heim’s theory further.*™ Merton described anomie as a gop be- tween effort and reward that makes it impos- 110 sible for people to have realy plan legitimate ways of achig it Rou, He Usted threo different tay hei, goals, the wants and ambitions ech are ight by their societ: mal prescribe legitimate means cf no" et goals: and (3) institutionayee "in gi actual resources available to the eet te . Merton claimed that Noy Mal” society expects all of its member’ tiey same goal (success and high incor 8 ty same norms (hard work, thrifts amg jdt However, society offers dines froups quite different insnen 2h means—unequal opportunities qe2t2lted tion, challenging jobs, business loa, °° forth. This situation’ puts a strane lovier-status groupsbecause the means, able to them don’t help them achiest scribed goals. coe Frustration, hopelessness, and result, not from any single one of res torsgoals, norms, or means—but free relationship among them. If a group te, modest goals, follows the society's nom: and has the means to achieve its goals ey. mately, there is no problem. Strain vents when there is a gap between goals and ing. tutionalized means. A person's respons ay be to weaken his or her commitese either to the prescribed goals, to the pre scribed means’ of achieving: tho goals, « both. Merton believed that there are five go. sible responses to this gap. (See Figure 7.1) The first of these responses is confer. mily; the others are all varieties of devia: behavior. Innovators (e.g., profession! thieves, white:collar criminals, cheats) believe in the goals but reject the prescribed means. Ritualists (eg., bureaucrats who rig: {idly follow the rules without thinking abot why the rules are there) make a virtue of overconformity to the prescribed means 2 the price of underconformity to the pt scribed goals, Retreatists (eg. tramps drunkards, hippies, drug addicts) withdaw from the “rat race" by abandoning both thtCommitment | cotnentrent ited | 10 prescriag Commitment to proscribed goals and the means. Hebelt (e.4.» mesnbers of revolutionary movements) sespond ino fifth way like retrestists, they reject both the prescribed goals and the prescribed means, but they put other goals and means in their place. They withdraw their support from a social system that they believe Is un- just and seek to rebuild the society with new goals and new means of achieving them. Notice that this apptoach to deviance focuses not on the characteristics of individ- uals but on the positions that individuals occupy within the social sytem. It is there- fore a sociological, not 2 yp cal, thee ory, but itis a limited one, Merton did not try to explain why some people choose one re- sponse while others choose another. Nor did he face the question of shy some people who are under great strain continue to con- form, as many do. Gulturatetranamission theary We mien now to a different kind of the- ory, sometimes called subcriture theory and comet cultural-transmission theory. This approach comes from the Chicago hae with who: does not picture devis vating at all. Th tries Independently. Pather, they exe siz ply following norms that are prescribed by = linaited subculture—2 social group thet ex- ists within the larger cociety but has beliels and nots that deviate from the point view of the larger society. Tae devi seen es conforming to o deviant 2 For example, a child brought up by notdevient, in their opinion, fr stea or she is simply living up to dards from yours ot mine. Cultural-transmission theory should also be distinguished from most ki inds-of-people theories, which see the deviant os abrovae! and warped. According to culturel-trans- mission theory, deviants leara thei patterns the same way enyone else does— their personalities ere chaped by the know!- des, and beliefs of the people they interact They may wiz: 2s different “Hinds of people” (22. F pockets or prostitutes), but they acquire habits in the same way that webecome pi ball wizards oF sociologists—usually by spending a lot of time with people who pley pinball machines, pick pockets, study “soci- ology, or hustle, as the case may be. 5 MCKAY Ina series of important books™ based mostly on research done in ” city of Chicago, Citfiord Shaw ickay tried to explain the d ‘American cities. They noied th rate areas in 1900-1906 were also th rate areas in 1917-1923, though the ethlow us to make precise predictions would al ve articular cas in any and theory implies that the ure is not homogencous but con- tadictory definitions of the same ‘ane of which is backed by the make the lar, Rates and preva- ‘ach kind of criminal behavior tence ot the extent to which social ar- ave encients foster of prevent exposure to rangtminal and anticriminal attitudes. For Frample, the mobility, diversity, and ano- nymity ‘of urban life create more oppor- nyiqies for procriminal contacts than the oppo controlled interaction patterns of rural mejety. Likewise, people who live in one oct town may be exposed to more crimi- Pat Gefinitions than people who live in Mother area, and so the crime rates will afyfer betweon the {wo areas. target cul ins com Role-self theory Role-self theory is the view that deviant behavior sometimes results when a person trios to justify his or her claims to a particu- farrole. This theory is based on the symbolig interactionist view described in Chapter 6. You will recall that George Herbert Mead and his students emphasized the fact that we have to identify, define, and classify the ob- jocts we encounter, for we live in a world of socially meaningful objects. We have to de, cide what sort of objects we are dealing with, Once we identify them —an “antique,” a “Pi- Cares Smongrel 9 “poker gaine— some set of attitudes and expectaticns is called to mind, and this largely determines what we will do with the object. These socially de- fined objects include people. By living in a social group we learn the categories into which we classify people. We learn the sys- tem of roles; we have ideas about what dif- ferent peaple ate like, expectations about how they should behave, and standards for judging their behavior. ‘As we learn roles we acquire our own identity, for the self is also a social object. It “can society. Some of these roles are assig: Jean Bosabonsioch Boren Culturot transmission theaties explain de- ianee in terme of “hanging out with the ‘wrong crowd.” ad is the actor as seen, labeled, classified, an: judged by the actor himself or herself, and we have to learn how to do these things. Un. “self-conscious- ." President and bartender, citizen and alien, old person and teenager, hip and square are part of the cul- turally defined set of roles in North Ameri. tous whether we like them or not; others are matters of choice. The self, then, is developed in the pro- cess of interacting with others. We discover the categories to which we have been as- signed and to some extent we decide what we will be. We claim to be a certain sort of person, and we must make the claim stick To do so we must meet the cultural stan- dards of the role. We know that we have done this when others show that they accept us as valid examples of that role. To lay a claim is to say, in effect, “Lam a such-and such sort of person. T invite you to deal with me on this basis. You may expect certainwould allow us to make pr in any particular case." ‘ Sutherland's theory implies that the larger culture is not homogencous but Cor" tains contradictory definitions of the sone tehavior, one of which is backed by the people who make the laws, Rates and pre“® Tone of each kind of criminal behavior depend on the extent to which sociel a fangements foster or prevent exposure {0 procriminal and anticriminal attitudes. For Example, the mobility, diversity, and ono- nymity of urban life create more oppor” unities for procriminal contacts than the fnore controlled interaction patterns of ural society. Likewise, people who live in one part of town may be exposed to mote crimi- hai definitions than people who live in nother area, and so the crime rates will differ between the two areas. Rol heory Role-self theory is the view that deviant ~ behavior sometimes results when @ person tries to justify his or her claims to @ particu: lar role. This theory is based on the symbolic interactioniat view described in Chapter 6 You will recalt that George Herbert Mead and his students emphasized the fact that we have to identify, define, and classify the ob- jects we encounter, for we live in a world of socially meaningful objects. We have to de- cide what sort of objects we are dealing wit Once we identify them—an “antique,” @ “Pi asso," a “mongrel,” 2 "poker game”~sorhe set of attitudes and expectations is called to mind, and this largely determines what we veill do with the object. These socially de fined objects include people. By living in a social group we learn the categories into which we classify people. We learn the sys- tem of roles; we have ideas about what dif- ferent people are like, expectations about how they should behave, ond standards for ‘doino their behavior. tnt * cultural transmission theories explain tionce in terms of “hanging out with te wrong crowd.” js thie actor as seen, labeled, classified, and judged by the actor himself or herself, od we have to learn how to do these things. Us til we do so we have no “self-conscic ness," and indeed, no “self.” President and bartender, citizen and alien, old person and teenager, hip and square are part ofthe o- turally defined set of roles in North Amezi- can society. Some of these roles ae assigned tous whether we like them or not; others = matters of choice. The self, then, is developed in the Fo cess of interacting with others. We discover the categories to which we have been a signed and to some extent we decide what we will be. We claim to be a certain sor ol person, and we must make the claim stich To do so we must meet the cultucl s dards of the role. We know that we have done this when others show that they accept us as valid examples of that role. To by? claim is to say. in effect, “lama such