example of deviance essay

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

7.2 Explaining Deviance

Learning objective.

• State the major arguments and assumptions of the various sociological explanations of deviance.

If we want to reduce violent crime and other serious deviance, we must first understand why it occurs. Many sociological theories of deviance exist, and together they offer a more complete understanding of deviance than any one theory offers by itself. Together they help answer the questions posed earlier: why rates of deviance differ within social categories and across locations, why some behaviors are more likely than others to be considered deviant, and why some kinds of people are more likely than others to be considered deviant and to be punished for deviant behavior. As a whole, sociological explanations highlight the importance of the social environment and of social interaction for deviance and the commision of crime. As such, they have important implications for how to reduce these behaviors. Consistent with this book’s public sociology theme, a discussion of several such crime-reduction strategies concludes this chapter.

We now turn to the major sociological explanations of crime and deviance. A summary of these explanations appears in Table 7.1 “Theory Snapshot: Summary of Sociological Explanations of Deviance and Crime” .

Table 7.1 Theory Snapshot: Summary of Sociological Explanations of Deviance and Crime

Functionalist Explanations

Several explanations may be grouped under the functionalist perspective in sociology, as they all share this perspective’s central view on the importance of various aspects of society for social stability and other social needs.

Émile Durkheim: The Functions of Deviance

As noted earlier, Émile Durkheim said deviance is normal, but he did not stop there. In a surprising and still controversial twist, he also argued that deviance serves several important functions for society.

First, Durkheim said, deviance clarifies social norms and increases conformity. This happens because the discovery and punishment of deviance reminds people of the norms and reinforces the consequences of violating them. If your class were taking an exam and a student was caught cheating, the rest of the class would be instantly reminded of the rules about cheating and the punishment for it, and as a result they would be less likely to cheat.

A second function of deviance is that it strengthens social bonds among the people reacting to the deviant. An example comes from the classic story The Ox-Bow Incident (Clark, 1940), in which three innocent men are accused of cattle rustling and are eventually lynched. The mob that does the lynching is very united in its frenzy against the men, and, at least at that moment, the bonds among the individuals in the mob are extremely strong.

A final function of deviance, said Durkheim, is that it can help lead to positive social change. Although some of the greatest figures in history—Socrates, Jesus, Joan of Arc, Mahatma Gandhi, and Martin Luther King Jr. to name just a few—were considered the worst kind of deviants in their time, we now honor them for their commitment and sacrifice.

Émile Durkheim wrote that deviance can lead to positive social change. Many Southerners had strong negative feelings about Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement, but history now honors him for his commitment and sacrifice.

U.S. Library of Congress – public domain.

Sociologist Herbert Gans (1996) pointed to an additional function of deviance: deviance creates jobs for the segments of society—police, prison guards, criminology professors, and so forth—whose main focus is to deal with deviants in some manner. If deviance and crime did not exist, hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people in the United States would be out of work!

Although deviance can have all of these functions, many forms of it can certainly be quite harmful, as the story of the mugged voter that began this chapter reminds us. Violent crime and property crime in the United States victimize millions of people and households each year, while crime by corporations has effects that are even more harmful, as we discuss later. Drug use, prostitution, and other “victimless” crimes may involve willing participants, but these participants often cause themselves and others much harm. Although deviance according to Durkheim is inevitable and normal and serves important functions, that certainly does not mean the United States and other nations should be happy to have high rates of serious deviance. The sociological theories we discuss point to certain aspects of the social environment, broadly defined, that contribute to deviance and crime and that should be the focus of efforts to reduce these behaviors.

Social Ecology: Neighborhood and Community Characteristics

An important sociological approach, begun in the late 1800s and early 1900s by sociologists at the University of Chicago, stresses that certain social and physical characteristics of urban neighborhoods raise the odds that people growing up and living in these neighborhoods will commit deviance and crime. This line of thought is now called the social ecology approach (Mears, Wang, Hay, & Bales, 2008). Many criminogenic (crime-causing) neighborhood characteristics have been identified, including high rates of poverty, population density, dilapidated housing, residential mobility, and single-parent households. All of these problems are thought to contribute to social disorganization , or weakened social bonds and social institutions, that make it difficult to socialize children properly and to monitor suspicious behavior (Mears, Wang, Hay, & Bales, 2008; Sampson, 2006).

Sociology Making a Difference

Improving Neighborhood Conditions Helps Reduce Crime Rates

One of the sociological theories of crime discussed in the text is the social ecology approach. To review, this approach attributes high rates of deviance and crime to the neighborhood’s social and physical characteristics, including poverty, high population density, dilapidated housing, and high population turnover. These problems create social disorganization that weakens the neighborhood’s social institutions and impairs effective child socialization.

Much empirical evidence supports social ecology’s view about negative neighborhood conditions and crime rates and suggests that efforts to improve these conditions will lower crime rates. Some of the most persuasive evidence comes from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods (directed by sociologist Robert J. Sampson), in which more than 6,000 children, ranging in age from birth to 18, and their parents and other caretakers were studied over a 7-year period. The social and physical characteristics of the dozens of neighborhoods in which the subjects lived were measured to permit assessment of these characteristics’ effects on the probability of delinquency. A number of studies using data from this project confirm the general assumptions of the social ecology approach. In particular, delinquency is higher in neighborhoods with lower levels of “collective efficacy,” that is, in neighborhoods with lower levels of community supervision of adolescent behavior.

The many studies from the Chicago project and data in several other cities show that neighborhood conditions greatly affect the extent of delinquency in urban neighborhoods. This body of research in turn suggests that strategies and programs that improve the social and physical conditions of urban neighborhoods may well help decrease the high rates of crime and delinquency that are so often found there. (Bellair & McNulty, 2009; Sampson, 2006)

Strain Theory

Failure to achieve the American dream lies at the heart of Robert Merton’s (1938) famous strain theory (also called anomie theory). Recall from Chapter 1 “Sociology and the Sociological Perspective” that Durkheim attributed high rates of suicide to anomie, or normlessness, that occurs in times when social norms are unclear or weak. Adapting this concept, Merton wanted to explain why poor people have higher deviance rates than the nonpoor. He reasoned that the United States values economic success above all else and also has norms that specify the approved means, working, for achieving economic success. Because the poor often cannot achieve the American dream of success through the conventional means of working, they experience a gap between the goal of economic success and the means of working. This gap, which Merton likened to Durkheim’s anomie because of the resulting lack of clarity over norms, leads to strain or frustration. To reduce their frustration, some poor people resort to several adaptations, including deviance, depending on whether they accept or reject the goal of economic success and the means of working. Table 7.2 “Merton’s Anomie Theory” presents the logical adaptations of the poor to the strain they experience. Let’s review these briefly.

Table 7.2 Merton’s Anomie Theory

Despite their strain, most poor people continue to accept the goal of economic success and continue to believe they should work to make money. In other words, they continue to be good, law-abiding citizens. They conform to society’s norms and values, and, not surprisingly, Merton calls their adaptation conformity .

Faced with strain, some poor people continue to value economic success but come up with new means of achieving it. They rob people or banks, commit fraud, or use other illegal means of acquiring money or property. Merton calls this adaptation innovation .

Other poor people continue to work at a job without much hope of greatly improving their lot in life. They go to work day after day as a habit. Merton calls this third adaptation ritualism . This adaptation does not involve deviant behavior but is a logical response to the strain poor people experience.

One of Robert Merton’s adaptations in his strain theory is retreatism, in which poor people abandon society’s goal of economic success and reject its means of employment to reach this goal. Many of today’s homeless people might be considered retreatists under Merton’s typology.

Franco Folini – Homeless woman with dogs – CC BY-SA 2.0.

In Merton’s fourth adaptation, retreatism , some poor people withdraw from society by becoming hobos or vagrants or by becoming addicted to alcohol, heroin, or other drugs. Their response to the strain they feel is to reject both the goal of economic success and the means of working.

Merton’s fifth and final adaptation is rebellion . Here poor people not only reject the goal of success and the means of working but work actively to bring about a new society with a new value system. These people are the radicals and revolutionaries of their time. Because Merton developed his strain theory in the aftermath of the Great Depression, in which the labor and socialist movements had been quite active, it is not surprising that he thought of rebellion as a logical adaptation of the poor to their lack of economic success.

Although Merton’s theory has been popular over the years, it has some limitations. Perhaps most important, it overlooks deviance such as fraud by the middle and upper classes and also fails to explain murder, rape, and other crimes that usually are not done for economic reasons. It also does not explain why some poor people choose one adaptation over another.

Merton’s strain theory stimulated other explanations of deviance that built on his concept of strain. Differential opportunity theory , developed by Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin (1960), tried to explain why the poor choose one or the other of Merton’s adaptations. Whereas Merton stressed that the poor have differential access to legitimate means (working), Cloward and Ohlin stressed that they have differential access to illegitimate means . For example, some live in neighborhoods where organized crime is dominant and will get involved in such crime; others live in neighborhoods rampant with drug use and will start using drugs themselves.

In a more recent formulation, two sociologists, Steven F. Messner and Richard Rosenfeld (2007), expanded Merton’s view by arguing that in the United States crime arises from several of our most important values, including an overemphasis on economic success, individualism, and competition. These values produce crime by making many Americans, rich or poor, feel they never have enough money and by prompting them to help themselves even at other people’s expense. Crime in the United States, then, arises ironically from the country’s most basic values.

In yet another extension of Merton’s theory, Robert Agnew (2007) reasoned that adolescents experience various kinds of strain in addition to the economic type addressed by Merton. A romantic relationship may end, a family member may die, or students may be taunted or bullied at school. Repeated strain-inducing incidents such as these produce anger, frustration, and other negative emotions, and these emotions in turn prompt delinquency and drug use.

Deviant Subcultures

Some sociologists stress that poverty and other community conditions give rise to certain subcultures through which adolescents acquire values that promote deviant behavior. One of the first to make this point was Albert K. Cohen (1955), whose status frustration theory says that lower-class boys do poorly in school because schools emphasize middle-class values. School failure reduces their status and self-esteem, which the boys try to counter by joining juvenile gangs. In these groups, a different value system prevails, and boys can regain status and self-esteem by engaging in delinquency. Cohen had nothing to say about girls, as he assumed they cared little about how well they did in school, placing more importance on marriage and family instead, and hence would remain nondelinquent even if they did not do well. Scholars later criticized his disregard for girls and assumptions about them.

Another sociologist, Walter Miller (1958), said poor boys become delinquent because they live amid a lower-class subculture that includes several focal concerns , or values, that help lead to delinquency. These focal concerns include a taste for trouble, toughness, cleverness, and excitement. If boys grow up in a subculture with these values, they are more likely to break the law. Their deviance is a result of their socialization. Critics said Miller exaggerated the differences between the value systems in poor inner-city neighborhoods and wealthier, middle-class communities (Akers & Sellers, 2008).

A very popular subcultural explanation is the so-called subculture of violence thesis, first advanced by Marvin Wolfgang and Franco Ferracuti (1967). In some inner-city areas, they said, a subculture of violence promotes a violent response to insults and other problems, which people in middle-class areas would probably ignore. The subculture of violence, they continued, arises partly from the need of lower-class males to “prove” their masculinity in view of their economic failure. Quantitative research to test their theory has failed to show that the urban poor are more likely than other groups to approve of violence (Cao, Adams, & Jensen, 1997). On the other hand, recent ethnographic (qualitative) research suggests that large segments of the urban poor do adopt a “code” of toughness and violence to promote respect (Anderson, 1999). As this conflicting evidence illustrates, the subculture of violence view remains controversial and merits further scrutiny.

Social Control Theory

Travis Hirschi (1969) argued that human nature is basically selfish and thus wondered why people do not commit deviance. His answer, which is now called social control theory (also known as social bonding theory ), was that their bonds to conventional social institutions such as the family and the school keep them from violating social norms. Hirschi’s basic perspective reflects Durkheim’s view that strong social norms reduce deviance such as suicide.

Hirschi outlined four types of bonds to conventional social institutions: attachment, commitment, involvement, and belief.

• Attachment refers to how much we feel loyal to these institutions and care about the opinions of people in them, such as our parents and teachers. The more attached we are to our families and schools, the less likely we are to be deviant.
• Commitment refers to how much we value our participation in conventional activities such as getting a good education. The more committed we are to these activities and the more time and energy we have invested in them, the less deviant we will be.
• Involvement refers to the amount of time we spend in conventional activities. The more time we spend, the less opportunity we have to be deviant.
• Belief refers to our acceptance of society’s norms. The more we believe in these norms, the less we deviate.

Travis Hirschi’s social control theory stresses the importance of bonds to social institutions for preventing deviance. His theory emphasized the importance of attachment to one’s family in this regard.

More Good Foundation – Mormon Family Dinner – CC BY-NC 2.0.

Hirschi’s theory has been very popular. Many studies find that youths with weaker bonds to their parents and schools are more likely to be deviant. But the theory has its critics (Akers & Sellers, 2008). One problem centers on the chicken-and-egg question of causal order. For example, many studies support social control theory by finding that delinquent youths often have worse relationships with their parents than do nondelinquent youths. Is that because the bad relationships prompt the youths to be delinquent, as Hirschi thought? Or is it because the youths’ delinquency worsens their relationship with their parents? Despite these questions, Hirschi’s social control theory continues to influence our understanding of deviance. To the extent it is correct, it suggests several strategies for preventing crime, including programs designed to improve parenting and relations between parents and children (Welsh & Farrington, 2007).

Conflict and Feminist Explanations

Explanations of crime rooted in the conflict perspective reflect its general view that society is a struggle between the “haves” at the top of society with social, economic, and political power and the “have-nots” at the bottom. Accordingly, they assume that those with power pass laws and otherwise use the legal system to secure their position at the top of society and to keep the powerless on the bottom (Bohm & Vogel, 2011). The poor and minorities are more likely because of their poverty and race to be arrested, convicted, and imprisoned. These explanations also blame street crime by the poor on the economic deprivation and inequality in which they live rather than on any moral failings of the poor.

Some conflict explanations also say that capitalism helps create street crime by the poor. An early proponent of this view was Dutch criminologist Willem Bonger (1916), who said that capitalism as an economic system involves competition for profit. This competition leads to an emphasis in a capitalist society’s culture on egoism , or self-seeking behavior, and greed . Because profit becomes so important, people in a capitalist society are more likely than those in noncapitalist ones to break the law for profit and other gains, even if their behavior hurts others.

Not surprisingly, conflict explanations have sparked much controversy (Akers & Sellers, 2008). Many scholars dismiss them for painting an overly critical picture of the United States and ignoring the excesses of noncapitalistic nations, while others say the theories overstate the degree of inequality in the legal system. In assessing the debate over conflict explanations, a fair conclusion is that their view on discrimination by the legal system applies more to victimless crime (discussed in a later section) than to conventional crime, where it is difficult to argue that laws against such things as murder and robbery reflect the needs of the powerful. However, much evidence supports the conflict assertion that the poor and minorities face disadvantages in the legal system (Reiman & Leighton, 2010). Simply put, the poor cannot afford good attorneys, private investigators, and the other advantages that money brings in court. As just one example, if someone much poorer than O. J. Simpson, the former football player and media celebrity, had been arrested, as he was in 1994, for viciously murdering two people, the defendant would almost certainly have been found guilty. Simpson was able to afford a defense costing hundreds of thousands of dollars and won a jury acquittal in his criminal trial (Barkan, 1996). Also in accordance with conflict theory’s views, corporate executives, among the most powerful members of society, often break the law without fear of imprisonment, as we shall see in our discussion of white-collar crime later in this chapter. Finally, many studies support conflict theory’s view that the roots of crimes by poor people lie in social inequality and economic deprivation (Barkan, 2009).

Feminist Perspectives

Feminist perspectives on crime and criminal justice also fall into the broad rubric of conflict explanations and have burgeoned in the last two decades. Much of this work concerns rape and sexual assault, intimate partner violence, and other crimes against women that were largely neglected until feminists began writing about them in the 1970s (Griffin, 1971). Their views have since influenced public and official attitudes about rape and domestic violence, which used to be thought as something that girls and women brought on themselves. The feminist approach instead places the blame for these crimes squarely on society’s inequality against women and antiquated views about relations between the sexes (Renzetti, 2011).

Another focus of feminist work is gender and legal processing. Are women better or worse off than men when it comes to the chances of being arrested and punished? After many studies in the last two decades, the best answer is that we are not sure (Belknap, 2007). Women are treated a little more harshly than men for minor crimes and a little less harshly for serious crimes, but the gender effect in general is weak.

A third focus concerns the gender difference in serious crime, as women and girls are much less likely than men and boys to engage in violence and to commit serious property crimes such as burglary and motor vehicle theft. Most sociologists attribute this difference to gender socialization. Simply put, socialization into the male gender role, or masculinity, leads to values such as competitiveness and behavioral patterns such as spending more time away from home that all promote deviance. Conversely, despite whatever disadvantages it may have, socialization into the female gender role, or femininity, promotes values such as gentleness and behavior patterns such as spending more time at home that help limit deviance (Chesney-Lind & Pasko, 2004). Noting that males commit so much crime, Kathleen Daly and Meda Chesney-Lind (1988, p. 527) wrote,

A large price is paid for structures of male domination and for the very qualities that drive men to be successful, to control others, and to wield uncompromising power.…Gender differences in crime suggest that crime may not be so normal after all. Such differences challenge us to see that in the lives of women, men have a great deal more to learn.

Gender socialization helps explain why females commit less serious crime than males. Boys are raised to be competitive and aggressive, while girls are raised to be more gentle and nurturing.

Philippe Put – Fight – CC BY 2.0.

Two decades later, that challenge still remains.

Symbolic Interactionist Explanations

Because symbolic interactionism focuses on the means people gain from their social interaction, symbolic interactionist explanations attribute deviance to various aspects of the social interaction and social processes that normal individuals experience. These explanations help us understand why some people are more likely than others living in the same kinds of social environments. Several such explanations exist.

Differential Association Theory

One popular set of explanations, often called learning theories , emphasizes that deviance is learned from interacting with other people who believe it is OK to commit deviance and who often commit deviance themselves. Deviance, then, arises from normal socialization processes. The most influential such explanation is Edwin H. Sutherland’s (1947) differential association theory , which says that criminal behavior is learned by interacting with close friends and family members. These individuals teach us not only how to commit various crimes but also the values, motives, and rationalizations that we need to adopt in order to justify breaking the law. The earlier in our life that we associate with deviant individuals and the more often we do so, the more likely we become deviant ourselves. In this way, a normal social process, socialization, can lead normal people to commit deviance.

Sutherland’s theory of differential association was one of the most influential sociological theories ever. Over the years much research has documented the importance of adolescents’ peer relationships for their entrance into the world of drugs and delinquency (Akers & Sellers, 2008). However, some critics say that not all deviance results from the influences of deviant peers. Still, differential association theory and the larger category of learning theories it represents remain a valuable approach to understanding deviance and crime.

Labeling Theory

If we arrest and imprison someone, we hope they will be “scared straight,” or deterred from committing a crime again. Labeling theory assumes precisely the opposite: it says that labeling someone deviant increases the chances that the labeled person will continue to commit deviance. According to labeling theory, this happens because the labeled person ends up with a deviant self-image that leads to even more deviance. Deviance is the result of being labeled (Bohm & Vogel, 2011).

This effect is reinforced by how society treats someone who has been labeled. Research shows that job applicants with a criminal record are much less likely than those without a record to be hired (Pager, 2009). Suppose you had a criminal record and had seen the error of your ways but were rejected by several potential employers. Do you think you might be just a little frustrated? If your unemployment continues, might you think about committing a crime again? Meanwhile, you want to meet some law-abiding friends, so you go to a singles bar. You start talking with someone who interests you, and in response to this person’s question, you say you are between jobs. When your companion asks about your last job, you reply that you were in prison for armed robbery. How do you think your companion will react after hearing this? As this scenario suggests, being labeled deviant can make it difficult to avoid a continued life of deviance.

Labeling theory also asks whether some people and behaviors are indeed more likely than others to acquire a deviant label. In particular, it asserts that nonlegal factors such as appearance, race, and social class affect how often official labeling occurs.

Labeling theory assumes that someone who is labeled deviant will be more likely to commit deviance as a result. One problem that ex-prisoners face after being released back into society is that potential employers do not want to hire them. This fact makes it more likely that they will commit new offenses.

Victor – Handcuffs – CC BY 2.0.

William Chambliss’s (1973) classic analysis of the “Saints” and the “Roughnecks” is an excellent example of this argument. The Saints were eight male high-school students from middle-class backgrounds who were very delinquent, while the Roughnecks were six male students in the same high school who were also very delinquent but who came from poor, working-class families. Although the Saints’ behavior was arguably more harmful than the Roughnecks’, their actions were considered harmless pranks, and they were never arrested. After graduating from high school, they went on to college and graduate and professional school and ended up in respectable careers. In contrast, the Roughnecks were widely viewed as troublemakers and often got into trouble for their behavior. As adults they either ended up in low-paying jobs or went to prison.

Labeling theory’s views on the effects of being labeled and on the importance of nonlegal factors for official labeling remain controversial. Nonetheless, the theory has greatly influenced the study of deviance and crime in the last few decades and promises to do so for many years to come.

Key Takeaways

• Both biological and psychological explanations assume that deviance stems from problems arising inside the individual.
• Sociological explanations attribute deviance to various aspects of the social environment.
• Several functionalist explanations exist. Durkheim highlighted the functions that deviance serves for society. Merton’s strain theory assumed that deviance among the poor results from their inability to achieve the economic success so valued in American society. Other explanations highlight the role played by the social and physical characteristics of urban neighborhoods, of deviant subcultures, and of weak bonds to social institutions.
• Conflict explanations assume that the wealthy and powerful use the legal system to protect their own interests and to keep the poor and racial minorities subservient. Feminist perspectives highlight the importance of gender inequality for crimes against women and of male socialization for the gender difference in criminality.
• Interactionist explanations highlight the importance of social interaction in the commitment of deviance and in reactions to deviance. Labeling theory assumes that the labeling process helps ensure that someone will continue to commit deviance, and it also assumes that some people are more likely than others to be labeled deviant because of their appearance, race, social class, and other characteristics.

For Your Review

• In what important way do biological and psychological explanations differ from sociological explanations?
• What are any two functions of deviance according to Durkheim?
• What are any two criminogenic social or physical characteristics of urban neighborhoods?
• What are any two assumptions of feminist perspectives on deviance and crime?
• According to labeling theory, what happens when someone is labeled as a deviant?

Agnew, R. (2007). Pressured into crime: An overview of general strain theory . Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury.

Akers, R. L., & Sellers, C. S. (2008). Criminological theories: Introduction, evaluation, and application . New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Anderson, E. (1999). Code of the street: Decency, violence, and the moral life of the inner city . New York, NY: W. W. Norton.

Barkan, S. E. (1996). The social science significance of the O. J. Simpson case. In G. Barak (Ed.), Representing O. J.: Murder, criminal justice and mass culture (pp. 36–42). Albany, NY: Harrow and Heston.

Barkan, S. E. (2009). The value of quantitative analysis for a critical understanding of crime and society. Critical Criminology, 17 , 247–259.

Belknap, J. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Bellair, P. E., & McNulty, T. L. (2009). Gang membership, drug selling, and violence in neighborhood context. Justice Quarterly, 26 , 644–669.

Bohm, R. M., & Vogel, B. (2011). A Primer on crime and delinquency theory (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Bonger, W. (1916). Criminality and economic conditions (H. P. Horton, Trans.). Boston, MA: Little, Brown.

Cao, L., Adams, A., & Jensen, V. J. (1997). A test of the black subculture of violence thesis: A research note. Criminology, 35, 367–379.

Chambliss, W. J. (1973). The saints and the roughnecks. Society, 11, 24–31.

Chesney-Lind, M., & Pasko, L. (2004). The female offender: Girls, women, and crime . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Clark, W. V. T. (1940). The ox-bow incident . New York, NY: Random House.

Cloward, R. A., & Ohlin, L. E. (1960). Delinquency and opportunity: A theory of delinquent gangs . New York, NY: Free Press.

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent boys: The culture of the gang . New York, NY: Free Press.

Daly, K., & Chesney-Lind, M. (1988). Feminism and criminology. Justice Quarterly, 5, 497–538.

Gans, H. J. (1996). The war against the poor: The underclass and antipoverty policy . New York, NY: Basic Books.

Griffin, S. (1971, September). Rape: The all-American crime. Ramparts, 10 , 26–35.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency . Berkeley: University of California Press.

Mears, D. P., Wang, X., Hay, C., & Bales, W. D. (2008). Social ecology and recidivism: Implications for prisoner reentry. Criminology, 46, 301–340.

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3, 672–682.

Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. (2007). Crime and the American dream . Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Miller, W. B. (1958). Lower class culture as a generating milieu of gang delinquency. Journal of Social Issues, 14 , 5–19.

Pager, D. (2009). Marked: Race, crime, and finding work in an era of mass incarceration . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Reiman, J., & Leighton, P. (2010). The rich get richer and the poor get prison: Ideology, class, and criminal justice (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Renzetti, C. (2011). Feminist criminology . Manuscript submitted for publication.

Sampson, R. J. (2006). How does community context matter? Social mechanisms and the explanation of crime rates. In P.-O. H. Wikström & R. J. Sampson (Eds.), The explanation of crime: Context, mechanisms, and development (pp. 31–60). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Sutherland, E. H. (1947). Principles of criminology . Philadelphia, PA: J. P. Lippincott.

Welsh, B. C., & Farrington, D. P. (Eds.). (2007). Preventing crime: What works for children, offenders, victims and places . New York, NY: Springer.

Wolfgang, M. E., & Ferracuti, F. (1967). The subculture of violence . London, England: Social Science Paperbacks.

Sociology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Deviance in Sociology: Definition, Theories & Examples

Charlotte Nickerson

Research Assistant at Harvard University

Undergraduate at Harvard University

Charlotte Nickerson is a student at Harvard University obsessed with the intersection of mental health, productivity, and design.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Deviance in sociology refers to actions or behaviors that violate widely-accepted cultural norms within a society. Since deviance is defined relative to sociocultural standards, what is considered deviant differs across societies and time periods, and is largely determined by those in power. Sociologists study how and why certain behaviors are defined and reacted to as deviant, as well as how labeling of deviance impacts individuals and groups.

Key Takeaways

• Deviant behavior is any behavior that does not conform to societal norms.There are many different types of deviant behavior, including impoliteness, violence, and substance abuse. These behaviors may or may not be criminal.
• While some forms of deviant behavior may be considered harmful or dangerous, others may simply be seen as odd or unusual.
• In some cases, it can be seen as a positive thing. For example, many cultures encourage their members to challenge the status quo and push boundaries in order to create change.
• Durkheim suggested that modern industrial societies were consequently characterized by moral confusion or ‘anomie’. This means that some members of society were more likely to challenge and reject shared values and norms of behavior and this ‘normlessness’ often resulted in crime and deviance.
• Anomie theory has since been further developed by other theorists, such as Robert Merton, who used it to explain deviance in his strain theory.
• The main tenets of modern anomie theories are that: (i) People conform to societal norms in order to gain rewards or avoid punishment; (ii) When there is a discrepancy between the goals people want to achieve and the means available to them to achieve those goals, anomie results, motivating deviance.

What is Deviant Behavior?

Deviance is a behavior, trait, or belief that departs from a social norm and generates a negative reaction in a particular group. In other words, it is behavior that does not conform to the norms of a particular culture or society.

It includes those behaviors that attract negative responses and social controls. It also involves crimes committed in society.

What is considered acceptable or rude varies depending on the culture you are in. For example, eating with your left hand in Arab nations is considered rude.

Some behaviors are acceptable for certain age groups and some activities are illegal for some age groups.

For example, some people who engage in deviant behavior do so in order to challenge existing social norms and bring about change.

Additionally, deviance can also be a way for people to express themselves and their individuality.

Any behavior that breaks the law or goes against societal norms can be considered deviant. One example of deviant behavior is drug use. Using illegal drugs is considered deviant behavior in most social groups.

Committing acts of violence, such as assault or murder, is also considered deviant behavior.

Other examples of deviant behavior include but are not limited to: theft, vandalism, graffiti, public intoxication, loitering, and littering.

Truancy can be considered to be a form of deviance. Truancy is a behavior where a student regularly avoids school without the knowledge of their parents or teachers.

Because deviance is socially constructed (not naturally occurring but created by the society in which it is found), there are no actions which in themselves are inherently abnormal or universally condemned by all societies at all times. Deviance is thus situational and contextual.

For example, while stealing is considered deviant behavior in most societies, it is not considered deviant in some indigenous cultures where “stealing” is seen as a way to redistribute resources.

Similarly, while arranged marriages are the norm in many cultures, they would be considered deviant in Western cultures where individuals have the freedom to choose their own partners.

Ultimately, what is considered deviant behavior varies from culture to culture, and even from one social group to another. While deviance in society often has negative connotations, deviance in culture is not necessarily bad.

Types of Deviant Behavior

Formal deviant behavior.

Formal deviant behavior is defined as behavior that violates formally enacted laws. This type of deviant behavior is often criminal in nature, and can result in punishments such as fines, imprisonment, or even death.

Examples of formal deviant behavior include but are not limited to: murder, robbery, assault, rape, and child molestation (Griffiths et al., 2012).

Informal Deviant Behavior

Informal deviant behavior is defined as behavior that violates informal social norms. This type of deviant behavior is often seen as more minor than formal deviance, and typically does not result in legal punishment.

Instead, people who engage in informal deviant behavior may be ridiculed or ostracized by their peers.

Examples of informal deviant behavior include but are not limited to: littering, jaywalking, public intoxication, and loitering (Griffiths et al., 2012).

Although informal deviant behavior is often seen as less serious than its formal counterpart, it can have serious consequences. Showing up late to work, for example, is an act of informal deviance that can result in dismissal from one”s job.

Subcultural Deviant Behavior

Subcultural deviant behavior is defined as behavior that violates the norms of a particular subculture. A subculture is a social group within a larger culture that has its own distinct values, beliefs, and behaviors.

Examples of subcultural deviant behavior include but are not limited to: gang violence, drug use, and prostitution.

While subcultural deviant behavior is often seen as criminal or harmful, it can also be a way for people to express their identity and solidarity with others in their group.

For example, many gangs use violence as a way to establish their turf and protect their members, as well as to create a shared sense of identity as “strong” and ready to take action (Copes & Williams, 2007).

Serial Deviant Behavior

Serial deviant behavior is defined as a pattern of repeated deviant behavior. For example, being convicted of multiple crimes.

For example, a teenager who shoplifts every time they enter a department store for the excitement is committing serial deviant behavior.

Those who habitually show informally deviant behavior can also be considered to exhibit serial deviant behavior.

For instance, someone who belches loudly and stands unnecessarily close to others may develop an image characterized by this unacceptable behavior, resulting in social punishment (Chercourt, 2014).

Situational Deviance

Situational deviance is defined as behavior that is considered deviant in a particular situation but not in others.

For example, public nudity is considered deviant in most public places, but is expected on nude beaches. Similarly, using profanity is only considered deviant when it occurs in settings where cursing is not allowed or frowned upon, such as at work or school (Chercourt, 2014).

Even within these settings, the attitudes of those around the person committing the deviant act influence how deviant the behavior is considered to be.

While some forms of situational deviance may be seen as harmless or even humorous, others can have serious consequences.

For example, while being inebriated in many situations may be interpreted as entertaining or humorous by others, driving under the influence of alcohol can result in accidents, injuries, and even death.

Sociological Explanations Of Deviance

Social strain typology (robert k. merton).

The social strain typology is a theory of deviance that was developed by sociologist Robert K. Merton. The theory suggests that there are four types of deviant behavior: subcultural, serial, situational, and cultural.

Merton”s theory is based on the idea that there is a tension between goals and means in society. Goals are the things that people want to achieve, such as wealth or success. Means are the ways in which people go about achieving these goals, such as working hard or getting an education.

When people cannot achieve their goals through legitimate means, they may turn to deviant behavior in order to get what they want. For example, someone who wants to be wealthy but cannot legitimately earn enough money may turn to theft or robbery.

The social strain typology is a helpful way of understanding why people engage in deviant behavior. It also helps to explain why some forms of deviance are more common than others.

For example, subcultural deviance is more likely to occur in poor neighborhoods where legitimate means of achieving goals are limited. Serial deviance is more likely to occur in individuals who have a history of engaging in deviant behavior.

And situational deviance is more likely to occur when people find themselves in situations where they are tempted to break the rules.

Structural Functionalism

Structural functionalism is a sociological theory that views society as a system of interconnected parts that work together to promote stability and order.

The theory is based on the idea that societies are organized in a way that allows them to meet the needs of their members.

Durkheim suggested that modern industrial societies were consequently characterized by moral confusion or ‘ anomie ’ – some members of society were more likely to challenge and reject shared values and norms of behavior and this ‘normlessness’ often resulted in crime and deviance.

The functionalist perspective argues that deviant behavior serves a positive function for society by providing a safety valve for people who cannot cope with the demands of everyday life.

For example, people who engage in minor deviant behaviors, like rudeness or angry outbursts, may be less likely to commit more serious crimes, such as murder or rape (Parsons, 1985).

The functionalist perspective also argues that deviant behavior can lead to social change. For example, people who challenge the status quo and push boundaries may help to bring about positive changes, such as increased equality or improved working conditions.

Gandhi, for example,  is often credited with helping to end British rule in India through his deviant behavior of leading peaceful protests and civil disobedience.

The public punishment of criminals also reinforces social conformity by reminding members of society about what counts as acceptable and unacceptable behavior. In other words, it functions to socially control society by reinforcing the rules.

Conflict Theory

Conflict theory is a sociological theory that views society as a system of power relationships that are in conflict with one another. The theory is based on the idea that social order is maintained through coercion and force, rather than consent or agreement.

Conflict theorists argue that deviant behavior is a result of social inequality. They believe that people who have less power in society are more likely to engage in deviant behavior as a way of challenging the existing order.

For example, people who are poor or members of minority groups may turn to crime as a way to get the resources they need to survive (Bartos & Wehr, 2002).

This theory originates from the work of Karl Marx , who argued that social conflict is a necessary part of economic change. Marx believed that capitalism would eventually lead to a revolution in which the working class would overthrow the ruling class and establish a more egalitarian society.

While conflict theory has its origins in Marxism, it has been adapted and expanded by other sociologists, such as Max Weber and Randall Collins.

Conflict theory is now used to explain a wide variety of social phenomena, including crime, violence, and discrimination (Bartos & Wehr, 2002).

Labeling Theory

Labeling theory is a sociological theory that views deviance as a result of the way society labels people. The theory is based on the idea that people who are labeled as deviant are more likely to engage in deviant behavior.

Lemert was one of the first to define the concept of primary and secondary deviance (1951). Primary deviance is deviant acts that occur without labels put on the person commiting the act.

For example, a teenager who drinks alcohol socially at a party and is caught, but only gently reprimanded by their parents, has committed primary deviance.

Secondary deviance , meanwhile, is a result of the labels that are put onn someone for committing deviant acts.

A person moves from primary deviance (the thing that gets him/her labeled in the first place) to secondary deviance (a deviant identity or career).

The importance of the distinction between primary and secondary deviance is that everyone commits primary deviance acts from time to time, with few social consequences.

Labeling theory argues that the act of labeling someone as deviant causes them to be seen as different from others. This difference can lead to discrimination and social exclusion, which can in turn lead to further deviant behavior.

For example, someone who is labeled as a criminal may have difficulty finding a job or housing. As a result, they may turn to crime in order to make ends meet.

Or, someone who is labeled as mentally ill may be excluded from social activities and have difficulty making friends. This isolation can lead to further mental health problems (Becker, 2018).

Labeling theory has been used to explain a wide variety of deviant behaviors, including crime, mental illness, and drug use. The theory has been criticized for its lack of empirical evidence, but it remains an influential perspective in sociology.

Frequently Asked Questions

What are some of the main causes of deviant behavior.

Some of the main theoretical perspectives that sociologists use to explain deviance include functionalism, conflict theory, and labeling theory.

Sociologists have found that deviant behavior is often a result of social inequality.

For example, people who are poor or members of minority groups may turn to crime as a way to get the resources they need to survive.

Additionally, people who are labeled as deviant by society may be more likely to engage in deviant behavior due to discrimination and social exclusion.

What is the difference between deviant and criminal behavior?

Deviance is behavior that violates social norms and arouses negative social reactions. Crime is behavior that is considered so serious that it violates formal laws prohibiting such behavior.

Not all deviant behavior is criminal. For example, social norms around clothing styles for hairstyles may vary from place to place. So, someone who wears unconventional clothes or has an unconventional haircut may be considered deviant in one community but not in another.

Similarly, people who break minor laws, such as jaywalking or littering, may be considered deviant but not criminal.

Similarly, not all criminal behavior is deviant. For example, breaking a law against selling alcohol on a Sunday does not involve committing an act of deviance in a society where selling and consuming alcohol is acceptable.

Is deviant behavior a form of non-conformity?

Deviance is a concept that describes non-conformity to social norms, values and civic expectations. Hence, it is a form of non-conformity.

Nonetheless, not all non-conformity is deviant.

Social norms vary from place to place, so what is considered deviant in one society may not be considered deviant in another. Additionally, social norms change over time, so something that was once considered deviant may become acceptable (and vice versa).

For example, tattoos and piercings were once considered deviant but are now widely accepted. Nonetheless, in a place where they remain uncommon, they may be non-conformist.

Bartos, O. J., & Wehr, P. (2002). Using conflict theory . Cambridge University Press.

Becker, H. S. (2018). Labeling theory reconsidered 1. In Deviance and social control (pp. 41-66). Routledge.

Chercourt, M. (2014). Encyclopedia of Social Deviance. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 54 (2), 83.

Cohen, A. K. (1955). Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. New York: Free Press.

Cohen, A. K. (2016) Kriminelle Subkulturen. In: Klimke, D. & Legnaro, A. (Hrsg.) Kriminologische Grundlagentexte. Springer VS: Wiesbaden. S. 269-280 .

Cohen, A. K. (1957) Kriminelle Subkulturen. In: Heintz, P. & König, R. (Hrsg.) Soziologie der Jugendkriminalität. Studien zur Sozialwissenschaft. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag. S. 103-117.

Cohen, Albert K. and Short, J. (1968). Research in Delinquent Subcultures. In: Journal of Social Issues , S.20–37.

Copes, H., & Williams, J. P. (2007). Techniques of affirmation: Deviant behavior, moral commitment, and subcultural identity. Deviant behavior, 28 (3), 247-272.

Durkheim, E. (1951). Sociologie et philosophie .

Griffiths, H., Keirns, N., Strayer, E., Sadler, T., Cody-Rydzewski, S., Scaramuzzo, G., … & Jones, F. (2012). Deviance and Control. Introduction to Sociology 2 e.

Lemert, E. (1951). Primary and secondary deviation. Crime. Critical concepts in sociology, 3, 603-607.

Lemert, E. M. (1967). Human deviance, social problems, and social control . Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall.

Marx, K., & Engels, F. (1967). The communist manifesto . 1848. Trans. Samuel Moore. London: Penguin, 15.

Merton, R.K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review 3 , 672–682.

Merton, R.K. (1949). Social structure and anomie: revisions and extensions. In: Anshen, R.N. (Ed.), The Family: Its Functions and Destiny . Harper, New York, pp. 226–257.

Merton, R.K. (1957). Social structure and anomie. In: Merton, R.K. (Ed.), Social Theory and Social Structure . The Free Press, New York, pp. 185–214.

Merton, R.K. (1957). Continuities in the theory of social structure and anomie. In:

Merton, R.K. (Ed.), Social Theory and Social Structure . The Free Press, New York, pp. 215–248.

Parsons, T. (1985). Talcott Parsons on institutions and social evolution: selected writings . University of Chicago Press.

Pfuhl, E. H., & Henry, S. (1986). The deviance process . Transaction Publishers.

Wellford, C. (1975). Labelling theory and criminology: An assessment.  Social Problems, 22 (3), 332-345.

Essays on Deviance

The Social Deviance: Types and Forms Essay

Deviance can be described as any form of behavior that goes against the cultural values, norms beliefs or practices. Social deviance can thus be defined as the violation of a society’s norms

Deviance is clearly evident in various settings within a society and can be divided into two with the first type being formal deviance that refers to the abuse of a society’s laws that have been enacted formally for example child sexual abuse, murder, robbery, incest, drug and substance and assault. (Erdwin H. Jr. p 54).

The second type of deviance is known as informal deviance which refers to the violation or abuse of social norms, beliefs or practices that have not been formally enacted as laws. These vary from culture to culture and may include simple habits like that of picking the nose and loud belching to serious behaviors that include tattooing, polygamy and homosexuality. (Erdwin H. Jr. p 54).

Erich Goode defines extreme deviance as the serious behavior, physical characteristics or beliefs that casts people outside a given society through stigmatization, discrimination or even exclusion from a particular society. An action or trait is regarded as deviant when it becomes unacceptable or unpleasant to many people. According to Erich, those involved in extreme deviance always want to associate with others with similar behavior hence creating a subculture that further highlights or strengthen their identity. Examples of such cultures of deviance include belief in white supremacy, involvement in the Earth First movement and alien abduction. These present ideologies are deemed by the society as abnormal. (Erich Goode, p 105).

Alien abduction involves an individual’s claim of having had a distressing encounter or meeting with an alien. The alien is described as a short grey-whitish skinned cat looking creature that has thin hands, this serves as a stereotype for a white man describing a black or even a Hispanic criminal, a concept that describes America where crime is defined by race. The individual mainly referred to as an alien abductee withdraws from the public and instead gets affiliated with groups that hold similar beliefs. Alien abductees alienate themselves from the society to form their own different society and culture.

White supremacy is believing that the white race is superior to every other races. This term can sometimes be used to describe the political philosophy that explains the great dominance of the whites in political and social issues. White supremacism involves a group of people that have formed their own culture different from that of the American values, practices and morals. This group believes that violence is the only way to ensure ethnic purification or cleansing that clears out the rest of the races and lives a pure white race in the society.

White supremacists share different values from those of the society, they form a subculture that gives them a sense of identity and that supports their beliefs hence reducing the rejection they receive from the ordinary Americans. According to some sociologists however, white supremacy includes megre beliefs that have been totally exaggerated by a large number of the white American majority. (Fredrickson George, p 163). The sociologists explain four white supremacy subcultures that include the Ku Klux Klan, the racist skinhead groups, the militant racists group and the neo Nazis. These four distinct groups have very distinctive beliefs in relation to race, religion, patriotism and the Jewish society. Though each subculture’s beliefs, recruitment procedures, commitment and political affiliations are different from other subcultures, they all believe that the human race is genetically as well as biologically different. White supremacy can be clearly identified as a major factor that results into racial discrimination and oppression whereby the non-whites are seen as outcasts. The creativity movement is an example of white supremacist. The movements define a person’s race in terms of religion and believe that a holy war based on race will at one time occur with an aim of eliminating all the Jews and other races from the world. (Fredrickson, George, p 162).

The Earth First movement is another extremely deviant group whose major influence was the anarchist political philosophy back in the early 1990’s. Earth first movement aims at protecting the earth by use of any possible means. The movement is not involved in any form of democracy and is instead involved in the damage and destruction of property of individuals involved in ‘the destruction of the earth’. These individuals include ranchers, loggers and farmers mainly those who practice genetically modified farming. The acts of destruction and damage are mainly through arson, sabotage and assault. The movement achieved its target of protecting mother earth through the destruction of other people’s property. It is only a small group of people with their own distinct ideologies and beliefs and whose acts are not only against the law but also cause harm to other members of the society.

Obesity is a condition whereby an individual’s weight is composed of more than 30% body fat. The condition that has turned out to be an epidemic in America is currently being viewed as a deviant behavior within various societies mainly due to the reaction it escalates from the society and also due to its various characteristics and traits that are similar to those of other socially deviant behaviors. One such trait is the fact that the condition is as a result of substance abuse that leads to severe effects just like alcohol or drug abuse or misuse. Children that are obese face a lot of stigmatization as well as victimization and as a result have a very low self esteem.

Also similar to other forms of deviant behaviors are the various factors that determine the obesity rate, these factors include age, sex and ethnicity of a child or individual. Parents and family are however regarded as those responsible for the weight and condition of a child as they play a huge role in determining a child’s diet, eating habits and lifestyle. (Tolle, Jr., Glen, p 4).

Obesity can be defined as a deviant behavior for various reasons. Apart from being unhealthy, obesity is extensively unacceptable in the United States. Obese people are seen as lazy, greedy and obscene and are highly discriminated against. For one to be termed as a deviant one has to have broken the cultural norms and beliefs hence is judged from his or her deeds. Norms are guidelines to societal behaviors. Obesity is a norm that is mainly based on traditional beliefs and manners that sometime depict an obese person as an outcast or abnormal. The attitudes, conditions and behaviors that label individuals as deviant all lead to obesity. Certain behaviors that result in obesity include inactiveness and excessive eating while on the other hand, a person’s or society’s attitude dictates ones perception on obesity. (Adler and Adler, p 50-51).

The sociological labeling theory of deviance can be used to define an obese person. Acquiring the obese status gives one the deviant status which can later be reversed and in turn bring back an individual within the accepted norm though this does not necessarily remove the deviant label. The society is harsher to individuals who acquire back their lost weight while they greatly cheer those who completely shed off any excess weight. It is very difficult for one who has regained lost weight to get rid of the deviant obese label. Those who completely shed off excess weight on the other hand are termed as positive deviants who the society looks at as role models.

Secondary and primary deviances have been described as steps in acquiring the deviant identity. Primary deviance involves the violation of the various norms that do not necessarily affect ones self esteem and role in the society. The person at this point does not show any obesity signs but is overeating hence feels the same as any other normal individual. Later, the person becomes visibly obese and is labeled by the society as obese. Secondary deviance is the stage where by an individual alienates himself from the society but later internalizes his or her identity and begins to freely interact with others with a condition similar to his. At this point, one has a very low self esteem.

Structuralism and interactionism theories can be used to explain the deviant obese behavior. Structuralism explains the positive role of deviance while interactionism explains the role of role models , peers and peer groups in influencing behavior whereby a person identifies him or herself with others in the society.

The American norm that defines beauty as thinness will continue to label obesity as deviance and the obese as deviant as long as it exists. Changing this norm is hence the only solution to building the self concept of the obese. (Adler and Adler, 245).

Engagement in premarital sex is an act that is greatly discouraged by parents hence regarded as a deviant behavior. Seventy seven percent of adults above the age of twenty one years view sex outside marriage as an abuse of the socially acceptable norms. Clinard’s definition of deviant behavior as the behavior that is viewed by a large number of people as wrong and intolerable can be used to support this. (Clinard, p 65).

Premarital sex can be termed as a deviant behavior similar to that of bhang smoking. Many parents and guardians view the behavior as one that is intolerable despite the fact that the behavior is normatively acceptable to the youths and is actively practiced. In this case parents and their children greatly differ in labeling premarital sex. Clinard’s definition depicts sex outside marriage as a deviant behavior from the adult’s view point. (Clinard, p 66).

Sexual child abuse is another extreme deviant behavior. In this form of child abuse a child is used to sexually an adult or an elder adolescent. Sexual abuse does not only involve physical sexual contact but also an adult’s indecent exposure of their sexual organs to the child, forcing the child to take part in sexual actions or behavior, displaying pornographic materials to a child or involving the child in pornographic activities. Incest is sexual abuse by a relative or member of the family.

Child sexual abuse as a deviant behavior has harmful effects on the victim. Such effects include trauma, stress and depression, physical harm especially to the genitalia, anxiety, possible low self esteem in adulthood and alienation whereby a child wants to stay alone. Incest is known to severely traumatize a child psychologically particularly if it is done by a parent. (Erdwin H. Jr. p 127).

Sexual abuse does not only violate the cultural norms but also the law meaning that any sex offenders are liable to be prosecuted in the court of law. This aspect further supports sexual abuse of children as extreme deviance.

From the discussion, it is evident that deviant behavior can only be termed as deviant by the audience members of the society or the victims but not those who are involved in the deviant acts. The subculture formed by the deviants can be seen as a justification for their actions.

Works Cited

Adler Patricia, Adler Peter. Constructions of Deviance Social Power, Context, and Interaction. 3rd ed. United States: Wadsworth, 2000.

Fredrickson, George (1981). White Supremacy . Oxford shire: Oxford University Press.

Clinard, Marshall (1961). Sociology of Deviant Behavior . New York: Rinehart Inc.

Erdwin H. Jr. (1980). Human Deviance, Social Problems, and Social Control . New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Erich Goode and D. Angus Vail (2008). Extreme Deviance . New York: Pine Forge Press.

Tolle, Jr., Glen. “The Emerging of Obese Children as Social Deviance” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CRIMINOLOGY, Atlanta Marriott Marquis, Atlanta, Georgia, 2007. Web.

• The Book "Crazy" by Pete Earley
• Obsession: The State of Mind
• Aggression, Violence and Deviance
• Concept of Deviance and Sociologists Researches
• Deviant behavior: Prostitution
• Malasie: How to Know If You Have It
• The Anorexia Nervosa as a Mental Illness
• Psychology of Social Perception and Communication
• Mental Health Stigma From American Perspective
• Final Wishes Before Death
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, November 4). The Social Deviance: Types and Forms. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-social-deviance-types-and-forms/

"The Social Deviance: Types and Forms." IvyPanda , 4 Nov. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-social-deviance-types-and-forms/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The Social Deviance: Types and Forms'. 4 November.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The Social Deviance: Types and Forms." November 4, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-social-deviance-types-and-forms/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Social Deviance: Types and Forms." November 4, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-social-deviance-types-and-forms/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Social Deviance: Types and Forms." November 4, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-social-deviance-types-and-forms/.

• To find inspiration for your paper and overcome writer’s block
• As a source of information (ensure proper referencing)
• As a template for you assignment

IvyPanda uses cookies and similar technologies to enhance your experience, enabling functionalities such as:

• Basic site functions
• Ensuring secure, safe transactions
• Secure account login
• Remembering account, browser, and regional preferences
• Remembering privacy and security settings
• Analyzing site traffic and usage
• Personalized search, content, and recommendations
• Displaying relevant, targeted ads on and off IvyPanda

Please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy for detailed information.

Certain technologies we use are essential for critical functions such as security and site integrity, account authentication, security and privacy preferences, internal site usage and maintenance data, and ensuring the site operates correctly for browsing and transactions.

Cookies and similar technologies are used to enhance your experience by:

• Remembering general and regional preferences
• Personalizing content, search, recommendations, and offers

Some functions, such as personalized recommendations, account preferences, or localization, may not work correctly without these technologies. For more details, please refer to IvyPanda's Cookies Policy .

To enable personalized advertising (such as interest-based ads), we may share your data with our marketing and advertising partners using cookies and other technologies. These partners may have their own information collected about you. Turning off the personalized advertising setting won't stop you from seeing IvyPanda ads, but it may make the ads you see less relevant or more repetitive.

Personalized advertising may be considered a "sale" or "sharing" of the information under California and other state privacy laws, and you may have the right to opt out. Turning off personalized advertising allows you to exercise your right to opt out. Learn more in IvyPanda's Cookies Policy and Privacy Policy .

Conflict Theory of Deviance: Definition, Examples, Criticisms

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

The conflict theory of deviance claims that deviance is the result of inequality in society .

It also argues that deviance is punished more strictly for those with less power. At the same time, the elite in society is much more likely to get away with crime.

Conflict Theory of Deviance: Key Terms

Before explaining the conflict theory of deviance in further detail, let’s look at the key terms of the approach.

Key Assumptions

The conflict theory of deviance makes two key assumptions about the causes and impact of deviant/criminal behavior:

1. Criminal behavior is caused by social inequality

Deviant behavior in a capitalist society results from social inequality and a scarcity of resources on Earth.

The poor and oppressed in society recognize the importance of equitable resource distribution.

This claim for equality might lead them to deviant acts and opposes the interests of the rich and powerful.

The latter strive to maintain and expand their wealth and privilege, including by passing laws intended to help them stay in power and exploit the poor.

2. Deviance is punished much more strictly for those with less power in society

People might even be stigmatized as “deviants” due to their lower social status or lack of power.

For example, the poor, homeless and people of color have been historically regarded as more likely to commit crimes or break the law (Franzese, 2009).

On the other hand, the social and economic elites (e.g., politicians, business people) are less likely to be regarded as deviant because of their position of power in society.

As we’ll see through the following examples, the conflict theory of deviance is not unified . It comprises many different contributors and theories—several of which build on the work of Karl Marx.

Examples of the Conflict theory of deviance

1. karl marx – social conflict as the root of crime.

Marx’s ideas laid the groundwork for the conflict theory of deviance, although he never wrote explicitly on this topic.

Marx divided the general population into two classes:

• the working class (the proletariat)
• the more powerful and wealthy elite class (the bourgeoisie)

it is the ongoing conflict between these two social classes that leads to crime. Marx claimed that economic exploitation is the propelling factor behind the proletariat’s anger and social justice demands.

For example, street criminals are primarily poor people. They resort to criminal activity because of their social marginalization and inability to find a job. Therefore, street crime merely reflects existing economic inequalities.

Marx saw laws as oppressive mechanisms for the proletariat, produced and enforced to further the interests of the bourgeoisie (the ruling class).

In this view, sending street criminals to jail mainly helps the wealthy maintain their economic power. It doesn’t solve the root of the problem, that is, social injustice.

2. Richard Quinney – the social reality of crime

Inspired by Marx’s writings, the famous American sociologist Richard Quinney argued that criminal behavior favors the powerful over the weak (and the wealthy over the poor).

This is because of what he described as “the social reality of crime” (Quinney, 1977). This refers to the social construction of crime as a societal function helping those in power to protect and further their interests.

For example, crime control in capitalist societies is accomplished through a range of institutions (e.g., government bodies, police forces).

These have been established by a political elite who wants to maintain the status quo . This explains why political reforms often reduce taxes on the rich while taxes from their income should be used to support those in need.

3. Wright Mills – the power elite

Sociologist Wright Mills was another thinker to expand on Marx’s conflict theory of deviance.

In his book The Power Elite (1956), he described the existence of a few rich and powerful people at the top of society who hold the most financial power and control resources. This group was dubbed the “ power elite “.

It includes wealthy managers and businesspeople, politicians, superstars, and military chiefs. These people create and can change the law and social rules in their favor.

They decide what is deviant and what is acceptable. It is the powerless that pay the cost of this.

Mill’s arguments justify why the wealthy and famous get away with crime (or suffer very little legal retribution). For example,

• Elon Musk—one of the world’s richest people—managed to not pay federal income taxes in 2018.
• The Canadian singer Justin Bieber was only fined $600 when found guilty of assault and careless driving in 2014, while the assault charge was completely dropped.

4. Edwin Sutherland – white-collar crime

The sociologist Edwin Sutherland invented the term “ white-collar crime ” to describe “crime committed by a person of respectability and high social status in the course of his occupation.” (1940, p. 10).

Sutherland juxtaposed upper- and lower-class crime:

• White-collar crime is perpetrated by “composed of respectable or at least respected business and professional men” (p.1). Examples of white-collar crime are tax avoidance or embezzlement of company funds.
• Blue-collar crime is “composed of persons of low socioeconomic status ” (p. 1). Examples of lower-class crime are assault, burglary, murder, robbery etc.

Sutherland’s conflict theory is important because it reframed traditional sociological interpretations of crime.

These were previously focused on “obvious” forms of crime (e.g., murder) that were often attributed to poverty and criminalized the less powerful.

5. Deviance and power through the prism of race

According to conflict theorist Alexander Liazos (1972), the people we often brand as “deviant” or “guilty” are also powerless (e.g., poor or socially marginalized).

For example, a homeless person, a person with mental health issues, or a person of color are more likely to be considered deviant than a millionaire who stashes their wealth in tax havens.

This social prejudice has manifested itself historically in the form of false accusations and police brutality against people of color.

Even today, the criminal justice system in America perpetuates disparities in the treatment of black people.

Research shows that while dr*g use rates are similar across racial groups, black people get arrested and punished on dr*g charges much more often than white people (Hinton, 2018).

6. Feminist theory of deviance 

The feminist theory of crime was popularized in the 1970s. It is a subset of feminist theory but will be discussed here as a conflict theory expanding on Marxism.

Women have been experiencing deviance and punishment differently than men because of their subjugated position in society (Balfour, 2006).

For example, in the past, many women fell victims of household violence by their partners or husbands.

These crimes were often described as crime of passion and the perpetrators would get away with a very lenient sentence.

Criticisms of the Conflict theory of deviance

The conflict theory of deviance has received multiple criticisms. Some of them coincide with the criticisms of the Marxist school of thought .

• Marx argued that the proletariat’s resentment and anger would eventually lead them to rebel and overturn capitalism in favor of communism . He believed that a communist society would be fairer: “In a communist society, we counterpose social peace to social war [and] we put the ace to the root of crime” (Marx & Engels, 1976, p. 248). However, the historical examples of communist regimes (e.g., Soviet Union, Eastern Europe) were by no means equitable societies and crime rates were not lower.
• Conflict theories of deviance look down on efforts and recent policy measures to create a fair criminal justice that works for all . (For example, by having a more inclusive and representative jury).
• Conflict theory of deviance (especially its earlier forms) assumes that all (or most) social problems and crimes can be pinned to social class. Even when the angle of race and gender are introduced, these theories have adopted a binary analytical lens (guilty/innocent, poor/wealthy, men/women – see also: dualistic thinking ). Scholars of intersectional criminology argue that we need to reflect on the impact of multiple identities related to power dynamics, class, gender, race etc., to articulate a robust theory of deviance (Potter, 2013).

Deviant behaviors, according to conflict theory, are actions that do not conform to the social institutions established by and to serve the interests of the ruling class.

According to conflict theory, social and economic factors are the root causes of crime. Conflict theorists also attribute deviance to the systemic inequalities related to gender and race.

There is no single conflict theory that applies to deviance and crime. Most of them descend from Karl Marx’s writings. What brings them together is that they trace the origins of social problems and deviance in the capitalist economic mode of production (and the inequalities it creates). Their weaknesses include their association with Marxism and their pessimistic take on society.  

Balfour, G. (2006). Re-imagining a Feminist Criminology. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice , 48(5), pp. 735-752.

Franzese, R. (2009). The sociology of deviance: Differences, tradition, and stigma . Springfield, Illinois: Charles C. Thomas Ltd.

Hinton, E. (2018).  An Unjust Burden: The Disparate Treatment of Black Americans in the Criminal Justice System. Vera Institute for Justice . Available at: https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/for-the-record-unjust-burden-racial-disparities.pdf.

Liazos, A. (1972). The Poverty of the Sociology of Deviance: Nuts, Sluts, and Preverts. S Society for the Study of Social Problems (Berkeley, Calif.), 20(1), pp. 103-120.

Marx, K., & Engels, F. ([1867-1894]1976). Capital: A critique of political economy . 3 Volumes. London: Lawrence & Wishart.

Mills, C. (1956). The power elite . New York: Oxford University Press.

Potter, H. (2013). Intersectional Criminology: Interrogating Identity and Power in Criminological Research and Theory. Critical Criminology , 21(3), pp. 305-318.

Quinney, R. (1977). Class, state and crime: On the theory and practice of criminal justice . New York; London: Longman.

Sutherland, E. H. (1940). White-Collar Criminality.  American Sociological Review , 5(1), pp. 1–12.

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Deviant Behavior

How it works

• 1 Introduction
• 2 Same Sex Marriage
• 4 Social impact
• 5 Personal Choice
• 6 Oppressed Minority
• 7 Create Money
• 8 Moral Issues
• 9 Conclusion

Introduction

Deviance can be any strange behavior that is not what society consider normal. Deviance can vary depending on how a person perceive it. Deviance can be positive or negative. An example would be getting a “speeding ticket” or getting an “award at school.” (Curra, 2017, p. 5) Deviance behavior is not the same in every culture or subculture. Public reactions to unconventional conduct can result in a stigma that labels such behavior as abnormal. Deviance manifests in two ways. The first is ascribed deviance, which refers to an individual possessing some sort of flaw that makes them appear unlike what is typically expected in public.

The second is achieved deviance, involving actions or characteristics that intentionally violate societal norms.

Same Sex Marriage

Same-sex marriage became legal in another country for the first time in 2001. In 2004, one U.S. state followed by legalizing such unions. By 2014, this had expanded to 13 countries and 20 U.S. states. In 2015, all 50 U.S. states legalized same-sex marriage. I believe that these unions should be illegal as they infringe upon traditional and moral definitions of family.

According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, marriage is the state of being united in a legal relationship as husband and wife. Justice Clarence Thomas stated, “In our society, conjugality is not simply a governmental institution, it a religious institution too.” (Williams, 2015) He made this statement in ruling whether same sex marriages should be legalized. Therefore, I feel that making same sex marriages illegal will benefit the world by keeping values and norms as part of family life.

I think same sex marriage is wrong, my religious belief is that marriage should be between a man and a woman. The bible references many scriptures referring to the union of two people. The only thing sticks out to me is the part about Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. Same sex marriages are morally wrong. In roman 1:26, 27 states “men lust for men.” I think that the wedlock of two people of the same sex, set an bad example for kids. By accepting immoral behavior, it makes children perceive this form behavior as a normal relationship.

“Sexual script has been constructed to tell individuals the appropriate and inappropriate ways of acting, thinking, and feeling regarding things sexual. (Curra, 2017, p. 287) Two men or two women in a sexual relationship is not what God intend for this to be. When looking at human nature as God created, we don’t see animals of the same gender having sex with one another. So, what makes men and women so different because the same God created animal created them.

Social impact

Some social impacts of same sex marriages include prejudice and discrimination. “Behavior of this kind would weaken society of the importance entering marriage to have children.” (Dinno 2013, p. 2) Having judges to perform same marriages goes against their religious beliefs. By making same sex marriage illegal it will take the pressure off churches to accept this absurd behavior. This stress come from having an immoral act push on the one’s faith to keep his or her job by marring couples of the same sex. Same sex marriages have couple going to court to get benefits of their spouse when they die.

Children of same sex marriages will have to face jokes and other children teasing and taunting them about this union. I feel children will question their gender identity at an early stage in their life. Children will be forced to accept a union that they do not believe in. Same sex marriage is an example of what Curra called “sexual deviance going beyond the prevailing culture and the subculture scripts and inventing their own.” (Curra, 2017, p.287) Some feel that making same sex marriages legal is a human right.

Personal Choice

An individual can tie bonds with whomever he or she choose. They shouldn’t feel guilt for loving a person for whom they are. Same sex couples feel that laws for heterosexual couples should be treated the same for them too. The Gallup Poll, “10% of Americans feel that same sex marriages would be good for society.” (Kiefer, 2003) “Some People find it easier to justify actions they can get away with.” (Urbatsch, 2018, p.229) Therefore, society has started to accept behaviors that are out of the norm,

Oppressed Minority

Same sex couple felt that they were not able to love freely the person that they were in love with. Society shun them by putting labels and treating them like outsiders. “Societal prejudice and discrimination against same sex marriages resulted in the couples damage to the self.” (Crespi, 2015, p.228-232) By having a law to let them marry a person regardless of gender was victory for them. They felt morals and dignity brought back into their life. “Sexual Stigma is institutionalized through marriage inequality because laws denying access to marriage reflect structural stigma.” (Ogolsky, 2019, February)

Create Money

Prostitution is an action that some people do to provide for their families, try to get out of poverty, meet their everyday needs. Prostituting gives some women a source of income. Prostitutes will have control over the money they make without having to turn it over to a pimp. Also, by making prostitution legal it will give states revenue and the money prostitutes make can be taxed. Prostitution is a money-making business. Prostitution in some major cities bring in a huge amount of money. According to Pew research, “Atlanta illegal prostitution bring in an estimate of $290 million a year, Miami value at $205 million, and Denver value at $40 million a year.” (Washington Post, 2015) Taxes from the illegal professional could be used for funding other police needs and help keep prostitutes stay safe..

Moral Issues

People work in a lot of professions that are unsafe. They use their bodies in inappropriate ways to make money. Some examples are strippers, models, and porn stars. These professions have been partially accepted by society. So, why is “prostituting symbolizing all the imperfection that had been avoided by the Angel or Saintly Women,” seem as an immoral professional. (Curra, 2017, p. 298) Some argue it is immoral in the eyes of God. Legalizing prostitution go against morals and beliefs of society. Social reaction to this behavior has women fearing their partners will seek sex outside of home.

Some sexual identities can lead to social inequalities when it comes to being accepted by society. Homosexuals, prostitutes, Lesbians all hold a stigma when it comes to sexual identities or sexual actions that is not seen normal. Deviant behavior come from social reaction of society when something not in the norm. Marriage of same sex has been accepted in many countries. Social institutions have replaced the meaning of a time honored merger with travesty called same sex marriage. “Battle over morality and legality of same sex marriages will be a constant part of the marriage battle.” (Curra, 2017, p.310) Prostitution is still the forbidden job for women, even though it is a multi-million-dollar business that could help the economy and decrease crime that surround it.”

Cite this page

Deviant Behavior. (2021, Sep 13). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/

"Deviant Behavior." PapersOwl.com , 13 Sep 2021, https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Deviant Behavior . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/ [Accessed: 31 Oct. 2024]

"Deviant Behavior." PapersOwl.com, Sep 13, 2021. Accessed October 31, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/

"Deviant Behavior," PapersOwl.com , 13-Sep-2021. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/. [Accessed: 31-Oct-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2021). Deviant Behavior . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/deviant-behavior/ [Accessed: 31-Oct-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Deviance — Deviance and deviant behaviour in society

Deviance and Deviant Behaviour in Society

• Categories: Deviance Human Behavior Society

About this sample

Words: 552 |

Published: Dec 12, 2018

Words: 552 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Works Cited

• Becker, H. S. (1963). Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. Free Press.
• Clinard, M. B., & Meier, R. F. (2011). Sociology of Deviant Behavior. Wadsworth.
• Downes, D., & Rock, P. (2016). Understanding Deviance: A Guide to the Sociology of Crime and Rule-Breaking. Oxford University Press.
• Goode, E., & Ben-Yehuda, N. (2009). Moral Panics: The Social Construction of Deviance. Wiley-Blackwell.
• Hagan, F. E. (2017). Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods, and Criminal Behavior. SAGE Publications.
• Merton, R. K. (1968). Social Theory and Social Structure. Free Press.
• Schur, E. M. (1971). Labeling Deviant Behavior : Its Societal and Individual Consequences. Harper & Row.
• Taylor, I., Walton, P., & Young, J. (2017). The New Criminology: For a Social Theory of Deviance. Routledge.
• Vold, G. B., Bernard, T. J., & Snipes, J. B. (2016). Theoretical Criminology. Oxford University Press.
• Walters, G. D. (2015). Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological Perspective. Routledge.

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology Psychology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1124 words

6 pages / 2787 words

2 pages / 702 words

1 pages / 659 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Deviance

In his thought-provoking essay, "Defining Deviancy Down," Daniel Patrick Moynihan explores the intriguing concept of how societies adapt to increasing levels of deviant behavior and redefine what is considered normal. This essay [...]

Deviance is an integral part of every society and represents a normal variation of human behavior. As societal norms and values are established, social control mechanisms are put in place to regulate and punish deviant behavior. [...]

Social norms play a significant role in shaping society and determining acceptable behavior. However, these norms are not fixed and can change over time. What was once considered typical may now be deemed unacceptable. One [...]

Labeling theory is a compelling sociological perspective that examines how society's labels, symbols, and interactions contribute to the construction of deviant identities and behaviors. This essay delves into the core concepts [...]

The study of deviance as a subset of sociology has a tendency to focus on the more common forms of deviance, such as petty crime and theft. These examples are plentiful and are not hard to come by. The theories and definitions [...]

The development of crime and deviance online has progressed with greater access to the Internet; however, the development of sexual deviance online has drawn mixed reviews on whether its advancement is a greater benefit or [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free