Category: Deviance

Deviance is any behaviour or activities that violate social expectations about what is the norm (Germov & Poole, 2011, p.511). Deviance refers to the norm breaking behaviour which has the capability to surround an individual with negative stigma. Over the last decade, public attention has grown due to the substantial increase in females being imprisoned in Australia. Statistics show there has been a 75% increase in women’s rates of incarceration totalling for 8% of the total prison population (Hislop et al., 2020). Family violence, substance abuse and homelessness show relevant trends as to why the number of women in prison is increasing dramatically (‘When mum goes to prison’, 2020). Evidence provides that the increasing number of women incarcerated are victims of domestic violence, 70 to 90% of women have been physically, emotionally or sexually abused at some point during their life (Hislop et al., 2020). 60% of women in prison are mothers and 80% are Aborginal women both which face key factors such as homelessness, violence and abuse which are linked to women’s increase in incarnation.

The number of female prisoners in Australia is increasing at a higher rate than males referring to the Australian Bureau of statistics (ABS). Single parent families are statistically proven to be the fastest growing family type in Australia, reported that since June 2011, 630 thousand single parent families consist of a majority of 84 percent single mother families (‘6224.0.55.001 – Labour Force, Australia: Labour Force Status and Other Characteristics of Families, Jun 2011’, 2020). In Australia, data has shown that the rates of females in prison has risen by more than 40 per cent over the last 12 months (‘Kids’ Health – Topics – Single parent families’, 2020). The absence of a father figure role in the house is the most important cause of true crime along with increased poverty-ridden families. Data provides that single parent families have a poverty rate of 45.8 percent, over four times the rate of traditional families. Single mothers on average, have a lower level of education which commonly leads to high poverty risks (Härkönen, 2017). Mothers without a reasonable level of education are more likely to struggle providing a substantial income which can lead to deviant behavior such as violence, robbery and drug activity. Families with abandoned fathers have consequences in deviant criminal behaviour which affects mothers. In a traditional family, a husband provides emotional and physical support during particular periods of a woman’s life. Mothers without this support are emotionally more distant, causing damage to their personal well being which is expressed by deviant behavior.

Aborginal women play a dominant role within the Aborginal society, in Australia imprisonment rates for Aborginal women are increasing rapidly. The increase in incarceration consists overall of 77% women, statistically proving that Aborginal women account for the majority of the growth at an alarming rate of 34% (‘Imprisonment rates of Indigenous women a national shame | Australian Human Rights Commission’, 2020). The high use of alcohol and substance abuse, unemployment rates, decreasing rates in education, child abuse and homelessness amount for a high rate of inprisonment towards Aborignal women and each factor is independently detrimental towards deviant behaviour (Jens Korff, 2020). Aborginal women in Australia are severely disadvantaged in society consisting of a shorter life expectancy and poorer health. Aborginal women have an extreme rate of violence in their communities due to illicit drug use, mental health issues and childhood trauma (‘Australians Together | Indigenous disadvantage in Australia’, 2020). The culture upbringing of Aborginal families worked to keep their children safe and to contribute to family and community life. The underlying effects of a disadvantaged upbringing from a young age result in child neglect and abuse from poor parenting and inadequate housing. Involvement in serious crime increases the rates of imprisonment which further reduce the chance of employment but increases the use of drug and alcohol abuse which causes a cycle of hopelessness from one generation of Aborginal women to the next (‘Chapter 5 – Parliament of Australia’, 2020).

Majority of women who have been incarcerated previously, are highly likely to reoffend depending on their criminal history. Recidivism is the result in which a criminal is rearrested with a new sentence within a three year period after the individual’s release (‘Recidivism’, 2020). Recent cross-state estimates of recidivism suggest that 58% of incarcerated women are rearrested, 38% are reconvicted, and 30% are returned to prison in the three years following release from prison (Deschenes et al., 2007). Cultural Transmission theory helps explain as to why multiple criminals relapse into their previous deviant behavior after being released. Previous criminals tend to fall into old habits and rejoin their social networks of deviant associates. After being released from prison, resocialization becomes a difficult process for an individual requiring to learn norms, values and beliefs. Aborginal women are raised within a traditional cultural homelife which majority are surrounded by violent and deviant behaviour. Women released back into familiar environments are influenced by deviant family and friends to partake in deviant behaviour if implemented back into daily lifestyle as the norm.

The functionalist perspective theory also known as Structural-Strain Theory was developed by American sociologist Robert K. Merton (1938-1968), introduced by Emile Durkheim (1893-1969). This theory explains deviance as an outcome of social strains that place pressure on individuals to deviate, simplified to express that “poverty breeds crime”. Low socioeconomic individuals that are placed in a disadvantaged category within their social structure supposes that certain pressure leads to specific kinds of deviant behaviour. Structural-Strain theory suggests that societies are developed from two main aspects which include culture and social structure. Values, beliefs, goals and identities are derived from within a culture which are developed in response to the existing social structure of society. Durkeim suggests that cultural diversity creates confusion over norms leaving individuals without clear moral guidelines. Deviant behaviour is the outcome of an imbalance in the social structure where social norms are weak, absent or conflicting. In relation to single mothers, pressure derived from lack of income or lack of education creates higher rates of crime. Statistics provided that in june 2012, there were 223 thousand jobeless one parent families which single mothers accounted for 89% (‘6224.0.55.001 – Labour Force, Australia: Labour Force Status and Other Characteristics of Families, Jun 2012’, 2020). Single mothers that were placed in the poverty threshold due to lack of unemployment and low education were unable to achieve certain goals through legal means, forcing individuals down a path of criminal behaviour to reach these goals. Structural-Strain theory is unable to provide an adequate explanation as to why middle class and upper class individuals commit crime as they are not affected by any of the given factors. It also ignores the impacts that social groups and subcultures have on behaviour and why only various subcultures engage in crime where others do not.

Cultural Transmission Theory developed by Edwin Sutherland (1939) explains deviance as a behaviour that is learned in the same way as conformity through the interaction with various individuals. Cultural Transmission Theory draws perspective of symbolic interactionism and applies them to the process of socialization into deviance. This theory suggests that crime rates increase in particularly lower class neighborhoods suggesting that deviance may have developed within local cultures transmitting over time from one generation to another. Just like conformity, individuals will deviate if their socialization encourages a contempt for these norms, stating that one may be influenced by deviant friends or family members rather than deviant acquaintances. Majority of Aborginal women are born and raised within a violent and abusive community, many are sexually assaulted and introduced to theft and substance abuse at an early age. Due to childhood trauma, dysfunctional behaviour occurs causing the individual to develop by associating crime and violence as their norm. Deviant behaviour in lower class can be evolved by accepting the values and beliefs within their own subculture, although criminal activity, drug use or theft can result in a negative sanction with the consequence of incarceration. Although this theory shows limitations by failing to explain why individuals become deviant despite their deviant association, individuals raised within a high crime neighborhood do not always become criminals and Individuals who become deviant have little to no contact with any deviants.

Therefore, it is stated that whether any of the four theories could account for certain deviant behaviours such as substance abuse, gamebling, theft and fraud however each of these theories display how deviant behavior occurs as the result of social processes. Deviance attribute to socially disapproved violations of important norms, it displays a relative matter as it determines who is deviant according to social standards. Deviance is observed through various functions which clarifies norms, enhances solidarity and identifies problems but also has multiple dysfunctions such as violating trust, confuses norms and diverts resources. By applying certain theories to specific deviant behavioural situations can help understand the process of thought and how certain influences are attributed towards the scenario.

Sport, both for participants and spectators, has grown rapidly over the last few years and has become more accessible to people across the whole world at many different levels. At the same time, technological innovations and huge financial investments in equipment, facilities and resources, mean that sport has taken on an essential role in society (Audickas, 2017). There have been record numbers at elite events, from the previous Rio Olympics in 2016 (Curton, 2019) to more amateur levels, such as ‘Parkrun’, where runners taking part have increased dramatically since the establishment of the event in 2004 (Ingle, 2019). For many, sport provides an essential release – an escape from the daily stressors and rules which dictate our lives – however, when certain boundaries are crossed, deviance may occur; deviance, which may be regarded in the wider society as harmless, has much greater effects and consequences in sporting arenas. In this essay, I will attempt to analyse the unique perspective sport gives us in which to study deviance. There are four main reasons why sport provides us with this special context, which will be elaborated on further below. After examining these, the focus will be on the use of performance enhancing substances as a form of deviance, their history and dangers, as well as evaluating the theories as to why athletes may take these drugs.

Deviance is a term employed when certain rules and regulations, which are regarded as socially acceptable by society, are broken. Sociologists employ the term ‘norm’ meaning “a shared expectation of what is (un)acceptable in the social world” (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). Therefore, when someone’s feelings, thoughts or actions are perceived as being outside of the ‘norms’, deviance occurs; this “violates established normative rules. It demands punishment and that the authority of rules be restored” (Karen and Washington, 2010). The functionalist theory states that without deviance, society would not be able to co-operate, so punishment for crossing boundaries is required to maintain the status quo, as it enforces normative standards.

As explored above, deviance may not always be regarded as a negative phenomenon. Certain behaviours may be subjectively seen as ‘wanted’ by society in certain sporting events and is understood to be controversial, but is part of the excitement for spectators (Atkinson and Young, 2008). An example of this is in rugby if an athlete sustains an accidental hit by another player and has a concussion. Since these actions are within the rules of the game and was carried with the intention of winning, this is seen in a positive manner. On the other hand, when behaviours are not socially desired this is ‘unwanted’ deviance, which is deemed unconventional. These actions violate the official rules and can have many punishments; as believed by the Functionalist theory, it is required to remind people of what is allowed and what isn’t within sport. Deviance can take multiple forms and will be elaborated on further within the essay with the focus on sport.

Sport provides a unique situation to examine deviance due to four main reasons as analysed by (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). Firstly, the behaviours, thoughts and actions which may be seen as acceptable in sport, may in contrast, be defined as deviant within the remainder of society and vice versa, what is allowed in society, may in turn be viewed as deviant within sport. So, there is very different view on the perception of deviance from either society or sports. Secondly, the multiple forms deviance may take across different sports means we cannot apply the same theory to explain them all, as deviance is contingent to each individual sport. Thirdly, deviance in sport may not always involve rejection of the rules and norms, however unquestioned acceptance and adherence to them. In other words, over-acceptance of norms. Finally, rapidly changing medical and technological advances in sport means there has not been the opportunity for norms yet to be created. I will now explore each of these areas in further detail.

On the first point, within sport, certain behaviours which are part of the game and are encouraged by fans as they are exciting, might be seen as deviant and controversial within wider society. For example, a boxing combat punch would incur criminal conviction within normal society, however, it is acceptable within the rules of the sport. On the other hand, behaviours such as taking various performance enhancing substances that are illegal for athletes, would not be an issue at a non professional level in wider society. For instance, an archer taking a beta blocker for reducing physical effects of anxiety before a competition is not allowed (Clarkson, 2012), however, for a musician before a concert, it would be acceptable (Savulescu, Foddy and Clayton, 2004).

To elaborate on the second point and unwanted behaviours as mentioned above, deviance can take many forms across multiple different sports. For example, acts of violence, aggression, intimidation, use of performance enhancing substances and cheating (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). Depending on the particular sport, certain actions may be viewed as deviant or not according to the social group and governing body who set the rules of the games. Therefore, deviance is contextual to the specific sport and culture.

Regarding the third point, most high level athletes will engage in behaviours to go above and beyond what is normal, in order to become the best. They may participate in deviant overconformity, which is, “supranormal ideas, traits and actions that occur when people uncritically accept norms and conform to them without recognising boundaries” (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). Athletes will strive for perfection by training to excess, and not stopping to consider the consequences. They adopt norms set by society related to working hard, being dedicated and overcoming hurdles to reach their goals by taking these values to the extreme. This is differentiated from ‘under-conformity’ (or the rejection of the rules) by the social constructionalism theory. This theorises that boundaries which are seen as acceptable and norms are socially constructed and may change over time depending on the context (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). Furthermore, as stated by Brissoneau’s model (Spitzer, 2007), athletes training at a high level require more and more in order to succeed in sport. An example of this, is when athletes resort to using performance enhancing substances when their bodies can no longer cope with punishing training schedules and the demands of high level competitions.

Finally, evolution in technology and medicine is playing an increasingly important role within sports. Due to this rapid growth, social norms are not formed quickly enough to guide athletes as to what is socially acceptable or not. An example of this is the Nike Vaporfly running shoes. This ground breaking design has springs inserted into the carbon insoles which enhance race performances by up to 4% (Woodward, 2019). This has lead to the breaking of both the men’s and women’s world best times in subsequent marathons (Suggitt, 2019; Douglas and Nakamura, 2019). It is clear from the evidence (Barnes and Kilding, 2019) that these shoes give an advantage to wearers. So are these shoes a violation of the rules as they give the athlete an unfair advantage?

I will now be focussing specifically on the use of performance enhancing substances as a form of deviance within sport, related to the above points. I will discuss the history and importance of studying drug use within sport and why athletes may resort to taking them.

There is a long history of performance enhancing drugs and of athletes pushing themselves beyond human limits of endurance (Dimeo, 2007). Back in 4th century BC, sportsmen were supplied with drugs to give them extra strength and combat fatigue whilst engaging in sport. By the middle of the 20th century powerful drugs were being used to enhance performance, such as the use of amphetamines to prolong time to maximum exhaustion during the 1952 Olympics. Similarly, in the 1976 Olympics, the East German swimming team won 11 out of 13 events (Savulescu, Foddy and Clayton, 2004). Upon investigation up to 48% of athletes were found to be guilty of blood doping (Sottas, 2011) Perhaps it was not until the famous case of Ben Johnson winning a gold medal in the 1988 Olympics, using steroids, (Blackwell, 1991) that awoke the general public’s awareness of drugs in sport (Sugden and Tomlinson, 2012). The use of varying kinds of drugs has increased dramatically over the past decades at all levels from amateur and professional (Savulescu, Foddy and Clayton, 2004).

There are multiple uses of drugs within sport which are categorised into four areas (Wagner, 2014); therapeutic, recreational and performance enhancing uses, as well as drugs to mask the detection of other drugs. The most important drugs include stimulants, anabolic steroids, human growth hormone and erythropoietin (EPO). This is a complex area as some drugs used for medicinal uses such as decongestants for a common cold or the flu, may contain substances which are on the banned list, leading to a positive test for athletes. Whilst, ‘blood doping’ describes how blood was intentionally transfused to increase the red blood cell mass artificially, in order to boost performance. EPO is a naturally occurring hormone in the human body which promotes synthesis of new red blood cells (RBCs). The more RBCs, the more oxygen can be taken up into the blood and thus delivered to working muscles and increases capacity during endurance sports. Since the 1980s, a recombinant human form (rHuEpo) has been used to replicate these effects with tablets which are hard to detect (Cazzola, 2000). This is an example of how rapidly medicine and technology are evolving, and how difficult it is for the sporting bodies to constantly update their test kits to match the innovative new drugs.

There are many physical and mental long term health consequences for athletes as a result of taking these drugs. For example, when sprinter Florence Joyner died of ‘natural causes’ aged 38, after an early retirement from athletics, this sparked further interest into the controversies of doping (Turnball, 1998) as she was presumed to have been taking drugs. Since in this decade, testing was under-developed and unable to detect such substances, these world records in the 100 and 200m remain controversial. Drugs such as EPO have many side effects, such as causing strokes and heart attacks. This was speculated to be the cause of death of professional Dutch cyclists in the 1990s when the drug was abused and not controlled (Savulescu, Foddy and Clayton, 2004). It is important for sporting bodies to be aware of the harmful side effects of these drugs and what signs to look out for in suspected athletes.

Despite the many health risks of using drugs, there are a lot of athletes who still use them due to a number of reasons. There are various frameworks and theories which attempt to explain the case. An encompassing model of drug use in sport (Donovan, 2012) may be summarised as having six major inputs into an athlete’s intentions and attitudes. These include threat and benefit appraisal, personal morality, legitimacy, personality aspects and finally their reference group and social norm influences. The two most important factors which may dictate an athlete’s choice are the affordability and availability of drugs. To further understand this model each component will be discussed.

A threat appraisal this is the perceived likelihood an athlete has that they will be tested and that the drug will be detected. It also includes the perceived health risks of taking the drugs and severity of the consequences of a positive test. It was found in a study (Tricker and Connolly, 1997) that the main reasons why university students did not use drugs was fear of getting caught and the consequent legal actions. This is used as the simplest deterrence model in modern day sport. On the other hand, the benefits of using drugs may be apparent to athletes when it will help them reach their desired goals, and if this will lead to considerable rewards. This relates back to the overconformity displaying in athletes, where they will do whatever it takes to be the best and gain the respect of their peers.

Normative factors which guide people’s actions and their compliance with rules include their personal morality, where people will obey what they believe to be laws; and legitimacy, where they believe that the body enforcing laws has the right to do so. (Donovan, 2012). This focuses on the attitudes and personal beliefs of athletes with their actions being of a particular manner ‘because it is the right thing to do’ regardless of the punishment. This aspect is now seen as the goal of most educational programmes which aim to shift the cultural attitudes on performance enhancing substances (Anshel and Russell, 1997). Sport and values have always been considered to go hand in hand, where sport is believed to teach people positive values such as honesty, resilience and respect (Butcher and Schneider, 1998).

Lastly, an athlete’s reference group and social norms are vital influences to their behaviour. When an athlete perceives that others are using drugs, it will increase their likelihood of taking them and becomes a normalised behaviour within their group. It creates a unique sense of bonding, making athletes feel special and they view outsiders as not understanding the multiple stressors they are under. This “expression of self importance and sense of being separate from and above the rest of the community” is defined as hubris (Coaxley and Pike, 2014). This sense of specialness may be re enforced by overconformity. Athletes become so consumed in their sport that all other aspects of their lives, such as relationships, personal physical and mental well-being, are ignored and consequently suffer. This was the case of Lance Armstrong, when he revealed his drug usage and the inevitable engagement due to the prevalence within cycling and the environment athletes are surrounded by (Dimeo, 2007).

There are further theories which attempt to explain why athletes may engage in using performance enhancing drugs. Waddington theorised that drug usage is due to normalising trends including the “medicalization of sport, subcultural traditions and technologization of training”, (Waddington, 2010). Athletes may self experiment with their bodies and build up as much speed, strength and endurance as possible. They may do so using any means which become available with new advances in medicine and technological aids, this could mean resorting to drug use. Subcultural traditions occur when athletes form special bonds with other team mates where their actions are normalised and athletes over-conform together so it is no longer regarded as deviant to them. Furthermore, Cashmore (2010) supports that the growth of the drug culture in sport to intensify levels of competition may drive athletes to use of drugs in sport to be able to survive and perform at a particular level.

The use of drugs in sport due to intensifying levels of competition is reflected in the case with Festina Watches in the 1998 Tour de France. The whole team were arrested after it was found that most of the athletes, managers, coaches and supporting staff had been supplying EPO and human growth hormones to the cyclists to aid performance, because the athletes were performing so well. This behaviour had become so ‘normal’ in the environment for many of these athletes, that they didn’t even question taking the drugs when it was advocated by everyone around them (Moller, 2015). The conflict theory may further explain the situation in which athletes are seen as having no choice in what they do, and are ‘victims’ of of corrupt profit making system in which those with economic power and money act in their own interests in order to make profit. If the athletes are encouraged by sponsors, team managers and their surrounding influencers, they may have no choice but to take these drugs if they want to stay as part of the group and receive funding and support. Those in power want athletes to become stronger and more powerful for a more exciting spectacle for fans, which in turn will bring more money into the system and further commercialise the bodies of athletes.

In my critical opinion, sport provides us with a unique context to study deviance due to various reasons. Deviance may be viewed from two main perspectives: from the outside, in the wider society; or from the inside, within an athlete’s peer training group. As mentioned above, some behaviours may be acceptable from one point of view, but not from the other and vice versa. Also, within sport, due to the varying rules between particular sports, behaviours may be viewed as deviant in one sport but not another, which further provides a unique perspective on what is allowed and what isn’t. Furthermore, due to the individual nature/personality of athletes, such as an obsessiveness or maladaptive perfectionist traits, they will be more likely to engage in deviant behaviours when they strive for distinction, and will do whatever it takes to reach that level regardless. As many athletes also believe they are a unique and separate group, certain behaviours may become normalised to them, although they are viewed as deviant within society. In order for the athletes to continue to train and compete at a particular level, they may view this as a necessary step rather than a form of deviance. From a societal point of view, deviant behaviour within sport may be enhanced by the pressures of putting on ‘an exciting show’ or living up to the Olympic motto of ‘faster, higher, stronger’. In an ever changing world, norms will be constantly be evolving, however deviance will always be an inevitable part of the world of sport.

Why is homosexual a deviant and heterosexual a normality that everyone must if not shall subject and conform its behavior to it? And who made the standard and became the judge, God, the Church, the government, or the majority of people? This essay will make the effort to analysis the phenomena of viewing homosexual as a deviant, by using the conflict approaches and the examples from Hong Kong.

What Is Deviance?

Deviation is the act which does not conform to social standards and social institution, the institution is a well-established institution and, in this case, it is a member of the family. Since many people believe homosexuality to be wrong in Hong Kong, society believes homosexuality to be different. However, deviations from society are relative, not absolute. Many cultures accept forms of homosexuality such as the ancient Greece, where gays are widespread and integrated into religion, education and philosophy. But Hong Kong’s society doesn’t accept the unacceptable view which, if heterosexuals are the usual for a majority of citizens, often results in discrimination against homosexuals.

What Is Sexuality?

Sexuality is not just about sex in the sense of sex and certain parts of the body are related to men and women. It includes sexual orientation, such as who is attracted to a person, and whether the person is identified as heterosexual or homosexual, as well as sexual fantasies and sexually related attitudes and values.

Sexual orientation refers to the sexual and romantic feelings of people of the same sex, different genders or more than one gender. People who refer to sexual orientation as ‘straight’ or ‘heterosexual’ are often attracted to people of different genders. People identified as ‘lesbians’ or ‘gay’ are often attracted to people of their own gender.

What Is Conflict Approach?

Conflict theory is used in this essay to study the power dynamics among members of a competitive group. The conflicting view is that there is unequal power distribution in society. Conflict theorists also believe that because of inequality there are conflicts between groups. Groups with more authority can control resources, including those that are essential, such as gender partners, and have famous social positions, such as political and business offices. Greater groups control so-called deviant behaviors and social regulations, including legislation, commercial practices and cultural and social standards. Any behavior which doesn’t satisfy a strong society’s expectations will be punished, exploited and/or stigmatized. The theory of conflict, including sexual conduct and areas of interest, is used by researchers in social science.

Through various methods, powerful groups try to preserve their power status, keeping less powerful people unable to control valuable resources. They do this by developing laws and policies; promote their favorite ways of living, and develop ways of writing and speaking to prove their social status. These processes are also followed by the development of laws and policies. The people at power need to develop social and cultural definitions of deviant groups to show the inequalities in power distribution in society. Strong and powerful people can make anybody they think is wrong with negative labels. The labelling of mental conditions that are evident or rebellious in women, the stigma of alcohol and drug users and the pity and immorality of homeless people, are historical examples. Many of them do not control themselves, rather than treating them as the product of a complex social environment, and those in a favorable position are not giving them an abnormal group which does not practice their favorite lifestyles.

As powerful people have the resources and will to do so, they can name and define groups that are abnormal. A deviant group can therefore be a way for a mighty person to control a vulnerable group legally. Conflict theoreticians discuss how less powerful people can be seen more often as deviant and how they are exploited and discriminated against. There are a number of different communities, including the community of lesbians, gays, bisexuals and transgender people (LGBT). Members of those populations have a systematic economic and political process of everyday cultural standards. Conflict theory provides us with a useful theoretical framework to explain why certain groups of people are worse than others and to find ways of supporting disadvantaged groups. The theory of conflicts can emphasize social inequalities, power differences, group member experiences in normal or divergent groups and exploitation and discrimination due to divergent group membership.

Application in Hong Kong

Conflict approach can be used to focus on how members of the LGBT community are affected by their abnormal state in society – from systemic discrimination, such as being deprived of work based on sexual orientation, to everyday cultural norms, as is commonly said that homosexuality refers to social phenomena as weak, stupid or inferior.

The rights of lesbians and gay people are deprived, such as household property benefits, wedding insurance, hospital visitation rights and the ability to hold their hands in public spaces without being mocked or disapproved, by married heterosexual couples. Conflict theorists argue that heterosexuals have a stronger social status, thus dismissing the LGBT community and making laws that favor a strong, opposed-sex lifestyle. The debate on homosexual marriage currently reflects the conflict among competitive groups experienced. Hate crimes against LGBT members have also shown the ability of heterosexuals to injure or even to kill people they do not think normal.

Conclusion

Conflict theory states that differences in power exist between competing groups. Powerful individuals use their positions to find ways of maintaining their position and increasing their position. The weak (gay) are trying to find ways to gain power and control, even though their goals are hard to achieve due to exploitation, discrimination, and abnormal labels on them. We can also see how multiple group memberships create more complex situations for individuals, preventing them from opposing powerful people in some cases.

Conflict theory enables us to study a broad range of social phenomena, ideas about power and inequality and ways of defining and dealing with social differences. It provides the basis for the study and interaction of people and how they treat each other in a daily way. Theory of conflict can also be used to try to equalize differences of power, to promote social equality and to improve the lives of disadvantaged groups.

Introduction

Pornography refers to the viewing or consumption of any piece of writing, movie, or picture that either show or describe sexual behavior the main purpose of which is to sexually excite people. This behavior is now accepted as normal in our society but there is a significant impact of it on the sexual health and quality of relationships of its consumers who have reported suffering from dire health issues such as anxiety and depression. It’s even found related to grave criminal activities and social evils such as rape, women abuse, and human trafficking (Gentry, 1991). Marketers of porn claim that it is a means of harmless entertainment or a healthy sexual outlet. It has been proved in scientific research that watching porn can affect the wiring of consumers’ brains. Not only does watch porn affect an individual’s sex life and relationship with a spouse but it even impacts negatively the relationships he has with his friends, family, and his own self (Perry & Hayward, 2017). This essay seeks to discuss what porn exactly is, the various forms in which it exists in our society, the way it affects the lives of its consumers, and how it can be checked. Several researchers have discussed how porn has given birth to crimes.

The History of Porn

Dr. Alfred Kinsey is partially responsible for the most recent view of porn and sexuality that we get to see in society presently. Its beginning is attributable to the founder of the Kinsey Institute for Research in Sex, Gender, and Reproduction. A zoologist by profession, Kinsey published a book in 1953 titled “Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female”. That book was believed by several people in society to be among the most significant and triumphant scientific publications of the 20th century. In that book, it had been proved that all those sexual practices that had been labeled as ‘taboo’ and ‘deviant’ by society had the majority of people engaging in those, but it still is unknown how the said book had been produced. How those experiments had been conducted is still questionable for obvious reasons. Dr. Kinsey in his research not only interviewed pedophiles but had overpopulated it with people in the field of prostitution and prisoners too (‘The Evolution of Porn: Where It Started, and How It Became So Normalized’, 2017). The investigation on sex by Dr. Kinsey was under controversy for going way beyond interviewing. This was so because the researcher even filmed his co-workers engaging in sexual activity for which he encouraged them. Documents from Kinsey have several reports with information about young children belonging to the age group of five months to fourteen-year-olds.

Progression of Porn in Society

Society is full of several misconceptions and misinformed attitudes about sexuality and Kinsey, through his research, helped to normalize some of those thus paving way for the emergence and growth of the business of pornography. In December 1953, Playboy released its first issue which featured Hollywood starlet Marilyn Monroe that later turned out to be the most recognized porn brand around the world. Hugh Hefner founded the porn magazine the stage for the booming business which had already been set by the warped research from Dr. Kinsey. Through his magazine, Hefner tried to capitalize on the trend but in order to maximize the sales it was required that he changed porn’s image to one that was a gentleman’s pursuit and not of a pervert. He did so by publishing essays and articles from well-known and respected authors with pornographic photos next to those, which made porn look legit and classy in Playboy. In the 1980s the next big shift took place when Video Cassette Recorders (VCR) came into the market when it became possible for people to watch movies at home at their own convenience and privacy. This was way easier for porn consumers to simply look for the videos instead of going to adult theatres with numerous other people thus making it easily accessible and reach expanded (Grubbs, Grant & Engelman, 2018).

The next major change came with the introduction of the internet which made it accessible to almost everyone. The consumers did not need to do anything more than simply have a personal computer with an internet connection and everything was available at their fingertips. The sheer availability of the most graphic sexual material both imaginable and unimaginable was accessible anytime, any day, and anywhere to almost everyone without any barriers or restrictions (Klein & Cooper, 2018). This gave a major boom to the porn industry that started flourishing and a growth of 1800% was noted in the number of pornographic websites between 1998 and 2007. In May 2004, an Internet traffic study was conducted in which it was revealed that visits to porn sites were three times higher than to popular search engines like Yahoo, Google, and MSN together.

Porn’s Effect on Society

As discussed earlier the porn industry is flourishing and is easily accessible due to easy availability through the internet and numerous websites. For this reason, it is also affecting individuals, their families, friends, and mental health, and giving birth to several crimes such as rape and human trafficking. Porn has several negative effects all of which are affecting not just the individuals consuming those but also their friends, family, and society overall. Pornography is majorly responsible for causing women abuse that can take several forms such as sexual, physical, and psychological abuse either by her former or current male partner (Kutchinsky, 1991)). Male violence experienced by women in private places has pornography as a major factor, but this unsettling truth is hardly ever discussed by either feminist anti-violence activists or practitioners. Porn is responsible for youth violence against women and some scholars even refer to porn as a training manual for abuse. The average age at which children begin to watch porn is just 11 years of age which means that the preparation for becoming women abusers starts at a young age and a large number of those viewers turn into women abusers at the altar stages of life (Becker & Stein, 1991). Porn doesn’t represent real life but presents perceived realism that majorly affects the adolescents who lack sexual experiences in real-life with women with whom they can contextualize the sex images of pornographic nature.

There are different shapes and forms taken by the pornification of girls and women that is of violent nature. One such form is the ‘revenge porn’ blogs and websites with the bulk of the perpetrators being male. The images and video recordings made by men with the consent of their female intimate partners while they are in a relationship with each other are later shared online on such websites as porn material following their breakup (Dodge, 2019). The extent of this problem cannot be determined with accuracy, but the damage done by it is of irreparable nature since anything posted online in cyberspace never ever goes away. The same applies to sexting as well which involves sharing images, videos, and written content of a compromising nature with other people through textual and electronic modes. Most or almost all of the victims of these crimes are female adolescents. Watching porn gives rise to deviant sexual fantasies in its viewers most of whom are youth and adolescents. Any sexual identities and behaviors that are considered as deviant as per the norms and beliefs of a society are referred to as sexual deviant behaviors. It is very much possible that any sexual behavior will be considered a criminal offense or a forbidden act in some cultures and societies.

For instance, prostitution, pornography, and pre-marital sex have all been defined as deviant acts of criminal nature and all have been considered normative as well by the same society. This means that sexual deviance is a social construct created through both the perceptions of the people and through social interactions. Deviant sexual fantasies are considered responsible for promoting sexual deviant behaviors which is a matter of serious concern (Williams, Cooper, Howell, Yuille & Paulhus, 2008). The authors of the study found the validity of this concern in non-offender samples for which the authors made the comparison between nine deviant sexual fantasies and behaviors with two samples of male undergraduates. At least one experience of sexually deviant fantasy had been reported by 95% of respondents in study 1 and 74% committed to engaging in at least one sexually deviant behavior. All positive correlations were there with an average of 0.44. However, acting out of fantasies was reported by merely 38% of the respondents belonging to the high-fantasy group. It was observed that the effect that pornography had on deviant behaviors was partially due to the rise in deviant fantasies.

Study 2 was conducted with the purpose of investigating what those possible moderators could be in which eight personality variables had been included. Those respondents who had been high on self-reported psychopathy had shown evidence of an association between fantasy and behavior. Additionally, there was evidence of an association between deviant sexual behavior and the use of pornography by people who were high in psychopathy (Becker & Stein, 1991). Overall, it was found that the relationship between sexually deviant behaviors and fantasies and between deviant behaviors and pornography use had been moderated by individual difference variables that were theoretically relevant. Despite all this information available about the negative effects of porn on the users and society, his family, and friends there is still constant discussion in society that insists that porn has plenty of benefits to offer and is a healthy, liberating, and natural pursuit. This needs to be checked with the help of new policy directions.

New policy directions should be such that they criminalize pornography then only positive changes can be seen in society. This problem can be dealt with with some effective solutions from critical criminology. One way to deal with this problem is for critical criminologists should come together and work on news-making criminology. The activists and scholars would research and write articles for newspapers, magazines, and social media websites detailing the destructive nature of porn. It has been observed that some porn stars such as Jena Jameson speak in favor of porn and their voices are heard as well. This calls for the formation of an anti-porn community that should actively work against this culture targeting the mainstream media and challenging the hegemony.

A website has been launched for stopping porn culture with the title Stop Porn Culture (SPC) at http://stoppornculture.org/. the SPC has a mission, as stated on its website, to pose a serious challenge to the pornographic industry and check the pornographic pop culture that is ever increasing. Their mission states that the organization aims at ending industries of sexual exploitation. The organization performed a feminist analysis of racist, sexist and economic oppression. An innovative suggestion from David Kauzlarich (in press) states that music is played and listened to through technology and pornography can be challenged with the use of various oppositional variants of that form of art. It can also be used to contain state or government crimes committed by people in power. Music has benefited various groups of people such as civil rights groups, labor organizations, and other such organizations and hence it is highly possible that anti-porn activists can benefit too. There is also a need for changing the kind of education imparted at the school level and initiatives must be undertaken for creating awareness. Introduction of sex education classes that teach more than just the mechanics of reproduction.

Conclusion

Pornography is about the viewing of any sexually explicit content. There are several modes in which pornography is served to the people – through magazines, websites, videos, etc. this is accessible by almost everyone – even children as young as 11 years old – who can access it on their computers at home meant for educational purposes. These adolescents’ minds are too immature to understand and differentiate right from wrong and end up taking the wrong steps in the future. It has been found that there are strong links between pornography and sexually deviant behavior among the youth especially males. Several social evils are on the rise due to the free availability of pornographic content almost everywhere and to anyone. Crimes such as rape, human trafficking, women abuse, violence against women, etc. are on the rise due to this. Revenge porn is a new tool adopted by young men who record sexual videos with their intimate partners with consent but later on after the relationship ends upload those on the internet in an attempt to defame or completely ruin the lives of their past female partners. Hence this should be checked with appropriate laws in place and also with sufficient efforts from the female activists for curbing this evil practice altogether this saving lives of millions of youth and saving them from falling prone to mental health issues like anxiety and depression while saving their relationship with their spouse, family, and friends.

References

1. Becker, J., & Stein, R. (1991). Is sexual erotica associated with sexual deviance in adolescent males? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 14(1-2), 85-95. doi: 10.1016/0160-2527(91)90026-j
2. Dodge, A. (2019). Nudes are Forever: Judicial Interpretations of Digital Technology’s Impact on “Revenge Porn”. Canadian Journal of Law & Society/La Revue Canadienne Droit et Société, 34(1), 121-143.
3. Gentry, C. (1991). Pornography and rape: An empirical analysis. Deviant Behaviour, 12(3), 277-288. doi: 10.1080/01639625.1991.9967879
4. Grubbs, J., Grant, J., & Engelman, J. (2018). Self-identification as a pornography addict: examining the roles of pornography use, religiousness, and moral incongruence. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 25(4), 269-292. doi: 10.1080/10720162.2019.1565848
5. Klein, J., & Cooper, D. (2018). Deviant Cyber-Sexual Activities in Young Adults: Exploring Prevalence and Predictions Using In-Person Sexual Activities and Social Learning Theory. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 48(2), 619-630. doi: 10.1007/s10508-018-1251-2
6. Kutchinsky, B. (1991). Pornography and rape: Theory and practice? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 14(1-2), 47-64. doi: 10.1016/0160-2527(91)90024-h
7. Perry, S., & Hayward, G. (2017). Seeing is (Not) Believing: How Viewing Pornography Shapes the Religious Lives of Young Americans. Social Forces. doi: 10.1093/SF/sow106
8. Pollard, P. (1995). Pornography and sexual aggression. Current Psychology, 14(3), 200-221. doi: 10.1007/bf02686908
9. The Evolution of Porn: Where It Started, and How It Became So Normalized. (2017). Retrieved 27 November 2019, from https://fightthenewdrug.org/how-we-got-here-the-spread-of-porn/
10. Williams, K., Cooper, B., Howell, T., Yuille, J., & Paulhus, D. (2008). Inferring Sexually Deviant Behaviour from Corresponding Fantasies. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 36(2), 198-222. doi: 10.1177/0093854808327277

1. Howard S. Becker- Labeling theory

Labeling someone as a criminal can cause other to treat them more negatively. The person may act more negatively if they are being treated negatively. In this theory, I can understand better about deviance and criminal behavior. Deviance refer to rule-breaking behavior which is the recognized violation of cultural norms. However crime is is a wrong against society proclaimed by the laws and if committed under certain circumstances, punishable by society which is the violation of a society’s formally enacted criminal law. Therefore deviance is a process of interaction between deviant and non-deviant and the context in which criminality is being interrupted. The more powerful and dominant group in society is create and apply a deviant label to the subordinate group. The causes of crimes can be related to social stratification.

In conclusion, to analyse deviant identity, Becker has used Hughes’ distinction between master and status trait (Becker, 1963, P.9). For example, the doctor has a certificate that fulling certain requirement and is licensed to give medicine to patient compare to those who does not have this status trait. I very much agreed with what Hughes has stated.

However, I also have disagree about this theory. This is because of the theory is neglect the importance of collecting the response of social control. Besides that this theory also cannot explain well that why people likes to break the law.

2. Stuart Henry – The Social Construction of Crime

Social construction is a theoretical position that cuts across a number of disciplinary and interdisciplinary fields. According to social constructionists, what counts as crime and deviance varies depending on who is defining it. “There are no purely objective definitions; all definitions are value-laden and biased to some degree” and what is defined as a crime by law “is somewhat arbitrary, and represents a highly selective process” (Barak, 1998, p.21) . Based on this article, they believe that there is reality exists and that why social construction is created. We all know that humans has tthe power to create reality and shape the world. So, crime is a social reality. The norms and value of society represent the whole society.

However, (Becker,1963, p.9) argued the components of interactionist approaches to deviance is “social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying these rules to particular people and labeling them as outsiders. So, from this point of view, deviance is not a quality of the act the person commits but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an offender.

In conclusion, I gain the idea that if the deviance, social problem and crime is situated in deconstructionist analysis, they have to change it to make the production slow and make it less harmful to constitute.

3.Emile Durkheim – The Normal and Pathological

Most of people may think that crimes is a society problem. In my opinion, I also agree that crime is a society problem because human created the society and when they fails to obey the rules it is considered as a crime. After I have reading ths article, I noticed that Durkheim is argued that crime should be seen as something which is functional and is necessary for society rather than something pathological which is a symptom of a society diseased. He points out that crime is present across all the time and space. We knows that all society have already experienced the crime. Therefore, crime has to be seen as normality in our life. For example like robbery, gambling and drug or alcohol addiction is happening arround the world and it is easy to see this on newspapers or people surrounding us in this modern era.

Besides that, Durkheim also argue that crime is a function. When a crime is being punished, the society must have their own rules.If the crime is not committed then the values of society will become blurred. If there is no punishment, then there will be no way of reestablishing the values that crime offends. Durkheim define that culturally relative is constitutes to crime rather than is universal. A crime is a crime because it offends the value and is not because of there is fundamental wrong.

In conclusion, we can see that Durkhiem use the two social facts in a research which is normal fact and pathological social fact. So, a normal fact in one society may become pathological in one society.

4.Alexander B. Smith and Harriet Pollack – The Reach of the Law: Sin, Crime and Poor Taste

A deviant person is one who does something we would not to do.Thus, deviant is consider as a subjective, but not all is cultural relative.Examples like rape, murder and assault is considered as crime. When social change occur, the old practices had became an acceptable and the new practices become objectionable. The one not acceptable will be label as deviant. In the middle America, they don’t care about racial, sexual discrimination and they aslo state that contraception and absorbing doesn’t seem wrong in their societies because it can limit the growth in welfare (Smith and Pollack, 1973, p.3) . In my opinion, I totally disagreed about this point because absorting can bring sides effect to the women and it is already considered as crime.In the same times some of the anthropology proffesor will said that murder and rape is a deviant. I also disagree because rape and murder is consider as crime not deviant.

Deviant can be divided into three categories which is sin, crime and poor taste.Crime is a acts which is objective, measurably harmful to community and it is totally unacceptable by any society that wishes to have a stable organism. Sin is refered to the actions are originally prohibited by dominant religion and religion community which has involves into secular laws. For eaxmple, prostitution and obesity is no measurable damage to unwilling victim, and if it is conduct as break the rule, it is already referred to as victimless crime. Besides that, the development of economic, scientific discoveries, communication and mass media can reduce the social and cultural isolation. This is due to we can use advances technology such as smartphones to communicate the people which are very far from us. Another one of deviant is poor taste. The human behavior is consider as a matter of taste. In this point, I very agreed to what author has stated “the man who wears skirt in public is consider as sexual deviant”. Besides that, they also has symbolic conduct which is a rational objective. We need to recognise that if symbolism is exist and if it is truly is a disadvantages then action will be taken to regulate the society. As an example, boys use the cosmetic product may be seem as no problem in today.

5. Jeff Ferrell – Culture, Crime, and Cultural Criminology

Culture criminology focus on how the cultural practice mix with crime and crime control in a modern set up. It use the meaning, symbolism and power relations in explain the causes and effect of crime and deviance. I believe that all of us know the culture cannot be seen because of it social factors like ethnicity and class and these contribute in major way and they are not the only things that affect it. (Ferrell, Hayward and Young, 2008, p.2 ) .Besides that, cultural criminologists can observe why norms are created, and how they action threaten them and why laws are created and broken. The concepts of culture helps us to better understand about the relationship between order and disorder. Thus, to understand the action of criminals and laws enforcement and the laws maker, they are seeing into conflict between legal authorities and deviant subcultures in modern society ( Ibid P.4).

Next, crime is define as culture. Criminal subcultures is shaped by class, gender, age and inequalities. Ferrell points that, to understand the reality of crime and criminalization, cultural criminology should take place in the dynamic of criminal subcultures and dynamic of mass media. (Ferrell, 1995, P.3). They should understand media, languages, symbolism and styles. Thus, making sense of crime meanig that paying more attention on culture. As an example, over the past 50 years popular music has shown us the meaning of criminalization of culture for instance punk in the 1970s. Another one example is Sex Pistols. It has a violent image and lead the media to represent punk subculture as a threat of society. This phenomena continues growing up with gangster rap and artwork. (Ferrell, 1995, P.4). In the other hand, they also define the rap musicians most come from poverty and ethnic discrimination. In my opinion, I do not agree with this author’s view.This is because if there is discrimination happen they will be stop creating album and not continue singing anymore.

Morever, I very agreed with what author has say “first we must investigate youth culture as primary setting for the production of alternative style and second, we critically explore youth as category of social, cultural, criminal stratification with class, gender and ethnicity. Especially the minority of young people, they find themselves is in the intersection points between crime and culture (Ferrell, 1995, p.9).

Through this article we understand better about cultural criminology. Cultural criminology also paying more attention on everyday crime and individuals or group that cause it overemphasizes on large scale industrial or political crimes (Ferrell, Hayward and Young, 2008, P.15). Lastly, the most things I would like to highlight at here is the relationship between culture and crime is also refer to the relationship between criminology and contemporary social social and cultural life as it can be seen in cultural criminology.

References

1. Barak, G. (1998). Integrating criminologies. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2. Durkheim, E. (1893). The Rules of Sociological Method,(pp. 65-73). New York: The Free Press
3. Ferrell, J. (1995). Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, 3(2), 25-42.
4. Howard S. Becker, (1963). Outsider: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance, (pp. 78-81).New York: Free Press
5. Hengry, S. (2009) Social construction of Crime. In J.Miller (Ed.), 21st Century Criminology: A reference handbook. (pp. 296-305).Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc.doi: 10.4135/9781412971997.n34

Abstract

White privilege is a topic that has picked up quite a bit of both positive and negative attention in the past few years, many claim that it does not even exist but that is only because it can be hard to recognize. Looking at examples like the controversy around the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Rally and Black Bike Week it is clear that whites have a distinct advantage when it comes to others accepting their devious behavior and that there are clearly positive white stereotypes that many people agree on having, although they do not acknowledge or, likely, even recognize that these are examples of white privilege. In situations like traffic stops and when ex-convicts apply for jobs there are obvious disadvantages for people of color, usually in the form of negative racial profiling, but there are also more subtle advantages for white people in these situations that stem from white privilege. Although white privilege does stem from positive stereotypes of whites and negative stereotypes of non-whites that we have all been taught since youth it is not a form of individual racism, instead it is an example of structural racism because it is something that plagues society as a whole that has seeped its way into US government for generations to the extent that white privilege exists in laws and policies and is, ultimately, a part of how our nation functions.

Keywords: White Privilege, Structural Racism, Racial Profiling, Stereotypes

White Privilege in Crime and Deviance and the Mark Those Crimes Leave on Non-White Lives

White privilege is most harshly visible in the injustices of the United States criminal justice system and in the public opinions toward black crime and deviance versus white crime and deviance. There is much controversy surrounding the topic of white privilege, many people do not even believe that it exists but it does, white privilege is very real and is present in every white person’s life, whether they want it or not. There are many self-proclaimed white allies that think that if they acknowledge white privilege then they no longer have it but that is not the case, white privilege is around whether we like it or not and it will stay around until consistent change towards equality can be made and sustained over future generations. Erasing white privilege is not a case of erasing non-white disadvantages but one of changing people’s entire mindsets because it is people’s predisposed opinions and thoughts about other races and ethnicities which are taught from childhood that create and sustain phenomena like white privilege. There are many non harmful, though that does not mean good or acceptable, aspects of white privilege, but there are also many dangerous aspects and one of the most dangerous is the disparities between how white and black crime and deviance are viewed by the populus because the positive white stereotypes- which are part of white privilege- that are already instilled in people’s minds cause non-white people to be unfairly judged by law enforcement, peers, and society as a whole.

White Privilege, Let’s Talk About That

White privilege is a phenomenon that is present in every white person’s life no matter their circumstances because it is not a tangible object or even an obvious advantage in most cases, instead it is the perception of white people by other people, both white and non-white, that has been formed by positive stereotypes and archetypes that are taught at youth through societal interactions, by parents, and by peers. White privilege is often examined as the disadvantages people of color have that white people do not because that is the easiest, most definitive way to point out the disparities between white and non-white people but white privilege is also characterized by the special advantages that white people have. There are many situations in which people of color have a distinct disadvantage which already creates a disparity between the races but, on top of that, white privilege provides an advantage for whites that widens the disparity further. It is important to examine the concept of white privilege because it gives white people advantages in life that they may never even recognize, it is fairly easy to see the disadvantages that people of color experience and to try to find solutions for them but it is much harder for people to recognize the subtle advantages that white people have and the positive stereotypes that many people unconsciously have towards white people because they have always been around for as long as anyone alive can remember. The biggest reason to open discussions on white privilege is so that we can collectively eliminate it from society, if we never talk about it then the same mindsets of white superiority and positive stereotypes of whites that fuel white privilege will persist and no progress will ever be made, but if we openly discuss it and recognize that it is, in fact, a problem then maybe we can find a way to fix it, even if it takes a long time.

Black Versus White Crime and Deviance

Every year in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina leading up to Memorial Day weekend two separate bike rallies are held, the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Rally, which is a predominantly white event, and Black Bike Week, which is a predominantly black event. Although both rallies happen at the same time, in relatively the same place, and people are doing the same things, the public opinions of them are wildly different and these public opinions, posted online and printed in newspapers, reflect the demonization of black people and the privilege and perceived innocence of whites. Although these comments were posted en masse in 2009 the same sentiments exist every year when the rallies come around. Not only do these comments and opinions affect how each rally is viewed and portrayed but they also affects how each rally is policed.

The Harley Davidson Motorcycle Rally is characterized almost exclusively by white bikers who already have positive stereotypes of whiteness in their favor but being compared to a rally of black bikers seemed to make everyone who commented on the rallies more willing to accept the actions and behaviors of the white bikers despite the fact that both the black and white bikers participate in nearly identical activities. Comments on the white rally often focus on how wealthy all of the participants must be because of how expensive it is to buy motorcycles and how it is a status symbol to own an SUV to tow motorcycles with; alternatively, the black bikers are portrayed as lower-class individuals despite having the same kinds of motorcycles as the white bikers and people at the black rally who were driving SUVs were seen as too poor to afford a bike and as hooligans who had only come to party and make trouble because they couldn’t even bother to bring a motorcycle. This comparison centered around white people with SUVs and black people with SUVs at their respective rallies shows that the comments made towards these bikers are not just about the bike rallies or their actions, they represent the public’s opinion of black people, and the stereotypes they hold against them, as a whole. The same action that sparked comments on affluence and prestige for white bikers sparked comments of poverty and deviance for black bikers which is a reflection of how the commenters view black people versus white people, they have positive stereotypes of the middle to upper class white person that can do no wrong and then they have negative stereotypes of the poor, streetrat, thug that they ascribed to the black bikers. Comments also rushed to the defense of white bikers, making the point of how all of the bikers they know are doctors or lawyers which worked to create a model of the “doctor-lawyer biker”(Eastman, 2014) type. This doctor-lawyer-biker archetype is then applied to all of the white bikers of the rally and those who do not conform are labelled as the bad apples who are few and far between, whereas comments and public opinion portrayed all of the black bikers at the black rally as thugs, gangsters, and hoodlums, basically, as the scum of society. Again these comments have little to do with the actual actions of the bikers, instead they are the product of the stereotypes people hold for black and white people. The loose morals and deviance of the white rally are characterized as good ways for people to be a bit rebellious and to feel young again because people see that most of the white bikers are older and decide that they couldn’t do any harm even if they were trying to and that they are just adults who never truly grew up, they portray the white deviance as endearing. In contrast, the same people view the black deviance, which is displayed in the same ways as the white deviance, as criminal and dangerous and there were multiple comments about people recounting how they had feared for their lives when encountering the black rally. The white bikers are predisposed to receive the people’s good graces since positive white stereotypes and archetypes, as well as the negative black stereotypes, have been ingrained in people’s minds since youth and that is the white privilege of this situation.

The stereotypes that have been fed to us by society, by our parents, and our peers are what create white privilege and it is perfectly exemplified by the public opinions of the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Rally versus those of Black Bike Week. One might say that these opinions do not mean anything or that people should just brush them off but all of these negative opinions stated en masse in such a short period of time caused action to be taken against the black rally. With so many people calling for heavier policing of Black Bike Week the Myrtle Beach Police Department had no choice but to increase their presence in the rally but with the opposite going for the white rally, as people trusted the white bikers to police themselves and even reported feeling safer with them around, the NAACP had to step in to call out the discrimination of the situation. After multiple successful discrimination suits the public opinion of the black rally only worsened and came to include the NAACP as a subject of their angry rants. The white privilege here is that no matter what the white bikers do they are always portrayed as innocent and trustworthy while the opposite goes for the black bikers doing the same things.

Structural Privilege for Whites in the USA

White privilege and structural racism go hand in hand in many situations, namely in racial profiling by police and in the mark that having a criminal record leaves on one’s life forever. Although there are many examples of inequality and injustice in the U.S. justice system, the issue of racial profiling best portrays how stereotypes and predisposed attidudes toward white and non-white people can affect how police officers choose who to stop, search, and arrest. In a study that looked into traffic stops at the New Jersey turnpike it was found that, although only 15% of drivers were racial minorities, 42% of all of the people stopped and 73% of all of the people arrested from these stops were black and that 77% of the people searched after being stopped were racial minorities(Alexander, 2010). These are disproportionately high to how many drivers passing through were actually racial minorities and these wildly high numbers are likely due to white privilege. Given the predisposition to view whites in accordance with their positive stereotypes and to give whites the benefit of the doubt because of these positive stereotypes and other beneficial archetypes, it is likely that police officers let minor traffic infractions slip for whites who were driving but they were not willing to do the same for people of color. Multiple studies reporting the same kinds of disparities in traffic stops, searches, and arrests between white and black drivers all across the country have been published and they all display the same racial inequalities, in Oakland, California, a study was published that claimed that African Americans were 2 times more likely to be stopped and 3 times more likely to be searched than whites(Alexander, 2010) and a study that analyzed traffic stops in Nebraska found that the search rate for black people after a traffic stop was almost double the search rate for whites(Kamalu, 2016). These disparities are not mere coincidences, people of color are stopped more often because police officers are legally allowed to use racial profiling in deciding who to stop, as long as race is not the sole reason for the stop(Alexander, 2010), but the distparity is widened even further by the privilege that the white drivers have, the officers are allowed to profile a white person as more trustworthy, due to white privilege, and let them off the hook just as they are allowed to profile a person of color as less trustworthy and decide to search them on top of pulling them over.

Not only do white people have unfair advantages in situations like traffic stops but they are also better off than non-white people after being convicted of a crime. A criminal record can make it extremely hard, if not impossible in some cases, for an ex-convict to get a job but research shows that even if a white and non-white person share all of the same qualifications and have the same crime on their record, the white person is still more likely to be hired than the non-white one; specifically, white people with a criminal record are are over 3 times more likely to get a callback for a job than a black person with a criminal record- given that their resumes are exactly the same- and a white person with a criminal record has a 3% higher chance of getting a callback for a job than a black person with no criminal record- 17% chance for whites with a criminal record and 14% chance for black people without a criminal record(Pager, 2004). These disparities are not the doing of individual people’s racist ideals or superiority complexes nor are they coincidental, they are the product of hundreds of years of racism and white superiority that has ingrained itself into our society. Individuals are not to blame because they rarely even know that they are being discriminatory or unfair because that is how they have been taught to think their whole lives, that is how we are all taught to think and that is what makes white privilege structural. Not just our parents and peers but laws, policies, and public statements made by government officials perpetuate white privilege everyday, it is not just something that gives white people advantages against getting pulled over or arrested and advantages towards getting hired, it is the mindset that our politicians use everytime they vote on a new piece of legislation or discuss an issue having to do with race or ethnicity, white privilege is always there.

Conclusion

White privilege is an ever-present phenomenon that reproduces itself in people’s minds, it manifests itself in a myriad of ways but, in relation to crime, deviance, and life after conviction, it is most obvious and unfair in the cases of traffic stops, parallel events like the Harley Davidson Motorcycle Rally and Black Bike Week, and the search for employment by ex-convicts. Each of these examples shows time and time again that people are more likely to forgive or ignore white crimes over non-white crimes, which not only means that white people live easier, more carefree lives doing the same things that would cause strife in a person of color’s life but that white people can get away with so much more, they can do so many bad things without ever facing the consequences, or at least without ever facing proportional and fair consequences. White privilege is not only present in the minds of individuals, it is present in our society as a whole as well as in the policies and laws that our government creates, the way of thinking that allows white privilege to thrive is just as present in the minds of politicians as it is the minds of everyone else, if it is present in the mind of a police officer when deciding who to pull over, who to search, or who to arrest then it must also be present in the mind of a senator or representative when deciding how to vote or which stance to take on matters concerning racial disparities. The only way to actually get rid of white privilege is to change the way we collectively think as a society, as a nation, otherwise no change against white privilege can truly occur.

References

1. Eastman, J. T. (2015). The wild (white) ones: comparing frames of white and black deviance. Contemporary Justice Review, 18(2), 231-247.
2. Pager, D. (2004). The mark of a criminal record. Rethinking the Color Line: Readings in Race and Ethnicity, 6, 276-279.
3. Alexander, M. (2010). The new jim crow. Rethinking the Color Line: Readings in Race and Ethnicity, 6, 259-268
4. Kamalu, N. C. (2016). African Americans and racial profiling by U.S. law enforcement: An analysis of police traffic stops and searches of motorists in Nebraska, 2002-2007. African Journal of Criminology and Justice Studies, 9(1), 187-206.

I have never really thought about the concept of social deviance before taking a class called “Social Deviance & Taboo” in University. Taking this class opened a whole new world to me in exploring all the different sides of social issues I have never really thought about from various perspectives. I view social deviance & taboos in the society as mainly labels and control over people by the individuals who have authority. What interested me the most was topics on vice careers and the “savior” mentality in this world. What role do they play in the society? How are they viewed as deviant? Should they be viewed as deviant?

What is Social Deviance?

What comes to your mind when you think about the phrase “social deviance”? What’s considered as deviant? Before diving into the world of the topics it relates to, let’s define what social deviance is. From my understanding, social deviance refers to behaviors, thoughts and beliefs that are different than or against social norms in any culture or value system. It is a part of every culture and society, it is sometimes viewed as the border line between acceptable and intolerable behavior. Most of the time it’s just a lot of labeling, judging, and classifying. People get labeled, judged, and classified as deviant because how their behaviors or thoughts contrasts the social norm and values the majority of people hold. In terms of classification of deviance, it is very culture bound and time bound in behaviors happening in different generations might have different labels or level of deviance or conformity. There are social rules that are written and sometimes unwritten, and anything opposite of or different from the rules are considered as deviant. Some of the examples of deviant behaviors are adolescent delinquency, mental illness, crime, suicide, prostitution, alcohol and drug addiction.

How does the process of labeling people as deviant works? We would then look at the concept of labeling theory. There are multiple factors that affect who gets labeled as deviant. There’s the distinction of choosing to be the social audience, which are the people who labels people, or not to be, which makes you be in the crowd of people who gets labeled. According to the article Labeling Theory, there are two types of deviance as suggested in the labeling theory: primary and secondary. Primary deviance is defined as the person displaying deviant behaviors. Secondary deviance is then defined as the person displaying deviant behaviors after being labeled by or received society’s reaction of deviance.

Would you consider yourself as deviant? Or feel like you’re being labeled as deviant? And by whom? It is to the point where the labeling process has shifted from public assessing to self-application, which then created space and opportunity for people who are labeled to create subculture in order to find a sense of belonging and becoming non-deviant in the subculture since everyone is the same or share similar characteristics.

Sex Work & Sugar Babies

Sex work or prostitution is considered as deviant career since it is something people view as shameful or guilty to sell your own body for money. People label and judge women who chose sex work as their career, assuming they are only in the industry for money and pleasure with no dignity or self-love and has no reason to be respected as a normal human being(?). It is how cruel and misjudging this current society has evolved through people’s perception and biases without understanding the industry and women’s reason of choosing this career path that caused sex workers to be excluded from the society and social world. Working in the industry has already given the sex workers the label of deviant, and the implications brought by the work also somehow reinforce their deviancy, affecting both their personal life and mental health.

As explored in the article “Vice Careers: The Changing Contours of Sex Work in New York City”, sex work is a fairly dangerous work in terms of personal safety. Outdoor sex worker has to be aware of potential violence and risk of arrest since they are at a higher explosion than that of indoor sex workers. However, outdoor sex workers have more support where there’s going to be someone or a group of sex workers that can help in dangerous situations than that of indoor sex workers. Indoor sex workers can easily be socially isolated since working indoor or independently might reduce social contact with other sex workers. This would then lead to the problem of having mental health problems where they don’t have any channels or platform to release their stress or express their feelings.

Why do women dive into the world of sex work and even stay in it for long periods of time? Women in sex trade has the benefit of having flexible work time, having control over one’s life, and the amount of money and unrestricting environment that no other socially legitimate jobs can offer. This makes us wonder why we don’t work towards creating a society where all the workers can have work flexibility, control over one’s life, and decent wages that can actually provide people with better life quality? Moreover, sex workers view their work as a profession and a career. They developed a sense of identity rather than shame and stigmatization. In many cases, sex workers like the freedom they have working in the industry with be benefits mentioned above and having more time to pursue other interest or improve life quality in general. Some workers only view this as their professions and career because they don’t think they can do anything else, which prolongs this cycle in the industry while getting the benefits other legitimate work can’t provide. It’s definitely understandable from their point of view as to their reasons in staying in the industry, whether it’s for financial reasons, or satisfaction, control and benefits that they can’t find from anywhere else.

The discussion of sex work industry reminded me of a similar “industry” that has been created in the recent years which combined sex work and relationships. There has been a rising trend of sugar dating where a sugar daddy or mommy (wealthy man or woman) who will provide financial aid in return for a sugar baby’s ‘companionship’. As explained in “Sugar for Sale: Constructions of Intimacy in the Sugar Bowl”, this type of relationship is being advertised and generated through the platform of a website called ‘Seeking Arrangement’ which “facilitates the search for a ‘mutually beneficial relationship’ between Sugar Babies and Sugar Daddies”. Sugar dating would be considered as a combination of traditional sex work and “emotional labor” since there has been an increase in value and demand of emotional intimacy demonstrating a transformation in the sex industry.

It is a good thing to see that sex work has become more normalized which definitely is one of the main reasons why the commodification of sex is changing when the importance of emotional intimacy has been added as a part of the expansion of the industry. This expansion of the industry has also been noted by Zimmermann as how it’s “facilitated by a decrease in the availability of jobs and an increase in cost of living”. I’ve heard many stories about how female college students would tell her friends about being a sugar baby and how that has helped her pay her tuition and her living expenses, and even getting a monthly allowance on top of everything. When this new category of “sex work” first came out, people were still thinking about it and phrasing it as providing “companionship” as a more elegant way of saying “I’m selling my body and soul for money”. It has been demonstrated by Bernstein’s research on client’s experience with escorts that they feel like they’re comfortable with or it’s ok for them to participate in these practices because it’s being viewed as “consumption of a product rather than deviant behavior”. This shift in the industry also changed general social attitudes about sex where sex is now increasingly viewed as a “recreational” activity rather than for traditional sexual reproduction. I would feel like it is still viewed as somewhat deviant for some people, but it has been shifting in its level of deviancy as defined by the society. However, it’s still interesting to see how more and more female and student population are getting involved in this new commercialized industry without facing the same level of biases and judgment when compared to traditional sex workers.

The “Savior” Mentality

First things first, let’s define the “savior” mentality. According to the article “Saviors believe that they are better than the people they are saving,” Flaherty defines how saviors have the mentality that they want to help others but are not open to suggestions and guidance from those they want to help, and think that they are better than the people they are helping. In this context, the “help” that these saviors are providing might not necessarily be the aid or support the population they’re trying to affect. The conversation is mostly surrounding those who are helping,” which is kind of rejecting any involvement from the population they want to “help” and not making an effort to understanding what they need. People feel like it’s a heroic thing to do to help people who are in need of “rescue” as the so called “saviors” when sometimes it’s all about having the trendy labels like social entrepreneur or change agent and making profit with a charitable and justice title on people. It makes me reflect on how I want to put myself in the role of a social worker in making the world a better place while considering how I want to present myself in the role.

There’s also authority figures who are the so-called “saviors” or who we think are “saviors” in our society that sheds a different perspective on how they operate in “helping” others. What was revealed by Crabapple in “Special Prostitution Courts and the Myth of ‘Rescuing’ Sex Workers” really showed how authority figures can abuse their power and even take advantage of the women and using the excuse of “rescuing” them to get what they want. These “saviors” are not only not providing justice and support for sex workers who are arrested, but also not distinguishing the difference between sex workers and trafficking victims to support them in different procedures. I do feel like we need to define “savior” in terms of the interaction and efforts that are being made with evidence to really say or trust people who are actually trying to make this world a better place and not treating anyone as “saviors” with them labeling themselves as one.

Many individuals in today’s society wonder what pushes people past a breaking point in which they become involved in actions not accepted by society, such as stripping, prostitution, drug use, alcoholism and more. The reasoning behind this is deviance. Deviance can be either positive (over conforming) or negative (under conforming). When applying the subject of crime to a type of deviance, it falls under the negative category because those who under conform in society have a tendency to reach their goals with non-accepted means. Considering the crime of drunk driving, many factors add up to develop a reason why so many people do it. Merton’s strain theory perspective explains the deviance behind drunk driving very well, using its’ assumptions, key focuses, and root of deviant acts to support it. Before focusing on Merton’s theory relating to the crime of drunk driving, we first have to recognize how sociologists understand the concept of deviance.

Sociologists believe that deviance is the result of unsuccessful socialization. With this being said, it makes sense that deviance surrounds us because not everyone can be perfectly socialized to fit in civilization’s cookie cutter image. Those who cannot fit in tend to become deviant, where they then violate the norms of society. Once those norms are violated, they are labeled as deviant and will continue to become more deviant as others define them that way. Sociologists also believe that the causes of deviance with crime is structural and that the solutions of deviance aim at changing the mind of the individual. In addition to this, sociologists process deviance as relative, variable, contested, and derived out of social norms.

The circumstances that influence whether an act is considered deviant or not is an important concept, as well as the relationship between norms and deviance. There are three circumstances that influence when an act is considered deviant. The first act is the social status and power of the individuals involved, so if one is socially acceptable in society, they are less likely to be considered deviant. The second circumstance is the social context in which the behavior occurs. If someone were to behave a way, where it is conventional and society will not give a second thought to, that behavior will not label someone as deviant. The last circumstance is the historical period in which the behavior takes place. This goes hand in hand with the relationship between deviance and norms. Norms determine whether behavior is considered deviant or normal. The behaviors that are considered deviant vary greatly, from group to group, society to society, and from time to time. Deviance can also vary through being either positive or negative. Positive deviance is a result of over conforming, and the consequences include increases in social unity, helps clarify norms, offers a safety value, and brings about needed social change. Unlike positive deviance, negative deviance is the result of under conforming, and can have serious consequences such as eroding trust, encouraging social disorder, encouraging further nonconformity in others, and diverting recourses from other social needs. Merton’s strain theory perspective coincides with the negative consequences of deviance greatly, which why understanding this perspective’s assumptions, key focuses, and the root of its’ deviant acts are vitally important to applying this theory to the crime of drunk driving.

To truly appreciate the overview of Merton’s strain theory perspective, one first has to look into his original assumptions of the theory. Merton based this theory off the concept of anomie. Anomie is a situation in which people do not experience the constraint of social norms, either because there are no norms in place or because they do not know the expected norms. The concept of anomie tends to occur when the norms of society do not match its social structure, which then results in strain. If someone does know the expected norms of society, they are oblivious to what is considered right or wrong, which can eventually get them into trouble such as crime. Merton’s strain theory perspective has two components that comprises its’ key focuses: accepted goals and accepted means. The best way to explain accepted goals and means is when they are used in context. According to Merton, in a well-structured society, the people will be able to reach goals by following socially acceptable means, if everyone can understand what the goals are. If not everyone understands the goals, then there tends to be a significant gap in society, also called a disjuncture. Disjunction is the root of deviant acts, because it places a substantial break between goals and legitimate means. When there is a disjuncture between socially approved goals and means, deviance is sure to follow.

There are multiple different responses to disjuncture and anomie when relating to goals and means. These responses can include conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion. While all these responses have their likes and differences, let us focus on innovation. Innovation is what Merton called the first mode of adaptation that is obviously deviant. Those who result in innovation (innovators) pursue and accept goals of society but, when confronted with a lack of legitimate means, devise new means. Innovators have a tendency to accept the cultural goals but reject the legitimate means for achieving the goal. Innovation goes hand in hand with crime, specifically the crime of drunk driving.

Applying Merton’s strain theory to innovation and the crime drunk driving works well because if one pursues to reach an accepted goal but cannot achieve it, they have to find another way to accomplish their goal. In the instance of drunk driving, one pursues the accepted goal of getting to point A to point B, but has no legitimate access to a ride. This circumstance leaves intoxicated people in an awkward situation of indecisiveness. They are indecisive because they do not have legitimate means to a ride to get them home safely. Denial, fear, and apathy are the three main reasons why an intoxicated individual may not have legitimate means to a ride. Denial is an example of Merton’s strain theory applying t drunk driving because drunk people may not realize how drunk they are. These people believe and tell themselves that they are fine and are perfectly capable of driving because they do not have another ride that is easily accessible, when in reality they are too drunk to drive. The second example that relates is fear. This example mainly applies to underage drinkers who are too afraid to call for help. Underage drinkers (or anyone who should not be drinking) will not ask their parents or any source of public safety for help because of the fear of being caught. They believe that it is not worth getting in trouble by asking for a ride when they think they can just drive themselves home. The third and last example is apathy, people not caring or knowing of the situation. Some people in this situation may not concern at all about themselves or others so that is why they decide to drive drunk. Other people may be unaware of the situation at hand and not know the risks of drunk driving. These three examples show how well strain theory can affect a person, especially in the instance of drunk driving.

Merton’s strain theory perspective clearly explains the deviance behind drunk driving. Referencing the examples provided in the previous paragraphs, there is plenty of strong evidence backing up this theory. The strain theory does not seem to leave anything out when relating it to the crime of drunk driving, because it explains the relationship between expected goals and accepted means, while also connecting the root of deviance, disjunction, and the type of deviance, innovation.

Overall, the concept of deviance is easily connected to many actions people encounter today, since deviance is the result of unsuccessful socialization. Deviance is derived out of social norms, where a deviant act is a violation of norms. Merton’s strain theory perspective represents how well deviance takes place in our day-to-day lives, such as drunk driving. Merton explains how having a disjunction can lead to deviance, because there is significant gap between accepted goals and legitimate means. With drunk driving, the goal was getting from point A to point B, but having no legitimate access to a ride. The reason concluded behind the deviant act of drunk driving was three examples: denial, fear, and apathy. Explaining the thought process of those who involve themselves with deviant acts explains how often deviance happens all around society, which is more often than we think. The root of deviance may be disjunction, but in my opinion, deviance is the root of all evils.

In the documentary, Crips and Bloods: Made in America, the history of gangs and gang violence are explored, as well as how they came to be. We see the different paths, especially in African American culture, that led to the present-day existence of gangs and gang affiliates. In the documentary, they interviewed individuals, specifically African American men, that have been or still are associated with the gang life. The prime object that helped explain the trajectory of gang life, the influence behind it, and the main goal was the contrasting individuals being interviewed as they all varied in age, gang affiliations, generations, and age in society that they were raised. We see older men as well as younger ones that are very different from each other but are all joined together and connected by the desire of acceptance as a colored man living in America.

Of the men that were interviewed and telling their stories, one man in a specific scene stood out to me immensely and had me thinking. Bird was one of the older men being interviewed throughout the documentary and his story is told early on. He explained that when he was a young boy, his mother and himself went to go sign him up to join the Boy Scouts of America. When they reached their destination and was able to talk to one of the scoutmasters, he explained that it may not be a good idea because the parents of the Caucasian children may have a problem with it. Bird recalled how not long after that, he and a group of friends created their own “club”, which would soon be referred to as a “gang” by the police and society. This scene had me thinking, does the oppression that young colored men experience early on in life prompt them to join these gangs and ultimately lead them on a path to seek acceptance and a feeling of belonging wherever they can find it?

While the presence of gangs and the pursuit of accomplishing the rules and beliefs they put into place go against most norms we have in American society, there tends to be more displays of deviance behavior within those societies than seen in the “typical” society. Robberies, shootouts, fights, graffiti, and drug associations are some of the implementations that become part of those individuals’ daily lives. Because of these labels that are inherently attached to these young men, there is a stronger disregard in behavior of actions that are shown. The best description of this theory is the labeling theory, in which the suggestion that people become “deviant” because certain labels are attached to their behavior by political authorities and others (Textbook cite). The mindset of “no matter what I do, I am going to be treated like a delinquent” is the running theme amongst these young men. The labeling is something that they cannot run from and it takes a lot more effort to detach from it than it does for others. If anything, it has become more of a way of life now, especially as the years continue forward and more and more generations of African American men are being born or introduced to this way of life early on. When it is something that is a tradition, the gang truly becomes and gives a sense of “family”.

The seclusions in society faced early on in life can impact a person forever. We depend on our organized social activities that give children in America the sense of “family”, love, unity, and belonging, whether that is through sports, instrument playing, or any other team activity. Lack of these opportunities, especially in young age, gives a sense of not belonging and having a skewed identity. The discrimination that most young colored boys face, especially in impoverished areas, are what ultimately leads them to create their own groups that provide a sense of love, unity, protection, and acceptance. They are able to form an identity because of the association with others like themselves, in whatever way is important to the individual. There has inherently always been that label on young colored men that they are viewed as people who will commit a crime (docum). When the social barriers are so common and have been a lifelong struggle in an individual’s daily life for their whole life, there is going to be resentment for the people and ways of life on the other side of those barriers.

With the common cycle of crimes and deviant behavior that is displayed from these groups of individuals, there comes the question of if these young men are participating in these acts for attention from society or if that is truly the way of life that they are living? The answer could be a combination of both, yet many of these deviant acts result in being pretty familiarized with our justice and law system. Young men in these situations are not new to the run-ins with local police. The sad fact is that many of these behaviors and acts of crime start at a fairly young age. By the time these individuals are of the age of eighteen, most already have an extensive criminal history and background. This unfortunately negatively impacts the chances of employment opportunities and the chances of these young men becoming productive members in society and making an honest living. This prompts these individuals to further stray away from being or even wanting to be members in society. They have to start making an income in different ways that are majorly against the norms we have in place in our society. It becomes a continuous cycle that comes full circle. Somehow, the circle needs to be broken and the cycle has to come to a halt.

To prevent youth from joining gangs, communities must strengthen families and schools and improve community supervision (cite ncjrs). The biggest change that needs to occur is within society. While income, area of living, and family situations or dynamics can and are major influences on young men joining these gangs to make some money to support their siblings at home or to have a sense of respect and love, these are usually stemming from the oppression and labeling that occur. A topic or argument like this is immensely vast and there are so many different views and opinions on this and there are going to always be extremists on either side, but the main objective remains the same. Even though we all have the same basic freedoms, regardless of race, background, income, or sexual orientation, we do not have the same opportunities. So many individuals have the same ideas, work ethic, drive, and intentions as the person next to them, but that social barrier is what keeps them from grabbing that opportunity unlike the individual next to them who are able to cross those boundaries or live a way of life as that of the desirable side. When you are constantly being told you are a certain way or being labeled your whole life, you are going to start to believe that. From a young age, the capabilities and potential for this specific group of individuals is limited and sometimes they never get to discover their true potential.

Introduction

In the past years we have witnessed an increase in the unethical behavior displayed by employees working in organizations, behaviors such as theft, treating coworkers badly, not giving their best working and so on. These behaviors are a massive concern for everyone around the globe.

Workplace deviance

The workplace deviance means action desire to cause harm to the company maybe the action described as the deliberate, voluntary behavior that exceeds institutionalized expectations and thus compromises the organization’s well-being. workers often create expectations for their organizations, when the expectations not met workers maybe make psychological contracts with their organization. This psychological contract ‘breach’ then poses potential problems, especially in the workplace.

Workplace deviance can result from the belief of the employee that his or her organization has in some way mistreated him or her. Employees often turn to misbehaving (or acting out) as way of revenge for alleged wrongdoing with their company.

Type of workplace deviance

the last five years had an interest in the company’s non-moral behavior. the intrinsic risks of unethical business practices have been brought to the public’s attention; thus, workplace anomalies such as avoiding commitment and coworker harassment are a pressing issue for most organizations. deviating conduct in the workplace is becoming a source of great concern throughout the companies. Public attention has been drawn to the inherent dangers of unethical business practices; thus, deviances of staff, such as avoiding commitment and ill-treatment of subordinates, are a pressing issue for most organizations.

Deviant behavior in the workplace is becoming a source of great concern throughout the world.

Concept of workplace deviance

Workplace deviance has also been described as a voluntary activity that breaches major corporate norms and thus undermines the organization’s well-being, its employees, or both.

You should remember that there is a great deal of theoretical similarity between workplace deviance and workplace violence, as both intention and purpose are aggressive. Several critical parts, despite several commonalities.

Production Deviance

• conduct that is counterproductive to the quality and quantity of work produced.
• Leaving work early
• Excessive breaks
• Intentionally working slowly
• Wasting money
• absenteeism
• lateness
• avoiding effort

Asset deviance

• Unethical activity enlivens the assets or goods of the company
• Sabotage equipment
• Acceptance of bribes
• Lying about working hours
• Business fraud
• robbery
• vandalism

Political deviance

• Using one’s power to hurt others in the business
• Favoritism
• Gossiping about coworkers
• Blaming coworkers
• Non-beneficially competing
• spreading gossip
• backstabbing

Personal hostility

• Hostile or violent acts abusing others
• sexual harassment
• verbal abuse
• coworkers cheating
• endangering coworkers
• physical assault

Personal Aggressive Behavior

The deviance from personal aggressive behavior at work can take the form of aggressive behavior. Common examples include sexual harassment, bullying, and open hostility towards employees. When employees show intolerance towards co-workers of different nationalities or cultures, deviance can occur in different work environments. In work situations, such as building, where security is paramount

Unproductive Behavior

Another example of deviance from the workplace is behavior that prevents or decreases productivity. Workers who spend time standing around the water cooler, taking the ‘scenic route’ when making sales calls or extending the time it takes to complete a task will hamper productivity, which will cost the company cash. Certain examples include late work, sick calling, sneaking out when in perfect health

Abuse of Property

Employees who misuse the property of the company commit deviant actions. Examples include workers who use company vehicles when personal errands are prohibited, who harm company equipment, or who deface work areas. Property abuse may also take the form of outright theft, such as taking home office supplies from workers or refusing to return items they borrowed from the company. Employees who are employed.

Company Politics

The ‘business rule’ game takes place in many workplaces and can be considered a form of deviance from the workplace. An employee can spread false rumors or gossip about someone else in order to gain a promotion or a more favorable job. A deviant act is also committed by managers who unfairly favor one worker over another or discourage worthy workers from advancing their careers. Employees who are monitoring.

Causes of workplace deviance

The aim of this paper is to analyze the effect of negative deviant workplace behaviors–those that breach organizational standards, policies or internal rules–as well as positive deviant workplace behaviors–on organizations that honorably follow them. The reasons people participate in such behaviors and some of the reasons why organizations require such behaviors.

Detailed explanation and highlight key examples of workplace deviance

Workplace deviance could be defined as the act of either actively or passively causing problems to sabotage the organization, mainly it is divided into two levels an interpersonal or an organizational level, the severity could be minor or serious.

In the case of interpersonal deviance employees target relationship level sabotage through gossiping and speaking badly behind other employees’ back. As for the organizational deviance employees take actions that could affect the organization badly for instance being late to work or absence or stealing from work and so on…

An employee could passively be harming the organization through silence if they have malicious intents to destroy the organization’s image or the organization as a whole. Deviance doesn’t necessarily have to be aggressive; it could be just unproductive which is still a negative behavior. In the aggressive behavior may occur when employees initiate violence of any kind, stealing, sabotaging property, assets, spreading bad words, obstructing work, or initiate strikes. And when it comes to the unproductive side of this matter when employees choose not to do their job properly, effectively, or efficiently. Handing their work late, or incomplete.

Being late to work or leaving work early for whatever reason, taking long breaks when there still is work that’s undone and awaiting, working slow on purpose, and sleeping on the job, these are all examples of production deviance. When it comes to sabotaging the organization’s property, stealing from the job, damaging company equipment, these are considered to be Property deviance. When employees or employers choose to take the actions of favoritism which a kind of discrimination towards employees, spreading rumors about others, falsely blaming others for things they didn’t do or actions they didn’t take, are part of political deviance. When it comes to Sexual harassment, verbal abuse, and workplace violence these are considered to be some kind of personal aggression.

Conclusion

There are so many steps an organizations can take to decrease the amount of organizational deviance. organizations can choose carefully whom they choose to hire by selecting potentially good employees that are professional. Using old employees as a Reference it is a good index of past deviant behaviors and potential unethical tendencies, but it might be difficult to get ahold of the true reason an employee is making these actions,. Separate from the hiring process, employers should give their employees the reason to remain disciplined by applying organizational justice to avoid future deviant behaviors.

Summary

Workers may participate in a wide range of inefficient, harmful, antisocial, and deviant job behaviors. Often accepted are articles on counter productivity legal and ethical issues and applicant and other stakeholder reactions to the organizational use of counter productivity selection systems. It is desired to submit theoretical work synthesizing and expanding existing literature as well as manuscripts providing empirical investigations into measurement and prediction. The workplace deviance means action desire to cause harm to the company maybe the action described as the deliberate, voluntary behavior that exceeds institutionalized expectations and thus compromises the organization’s well-being.

Workplace deviance has also been described as a voluntary activity that breaches major corporate norms and thus undermines the organization’s well-being, its employees, or both. Production deviance, which means that is counterproductive to the quality and quantity of work produced. Like Leaving work early, absenteeism and lateness. Asset deviance it is the Unethical activity of destroying the assets or goods of the company. Like Acceptance of bribes, robbery and vandalism. Political deviance, Using one’s power to hurt others in the business. like Favoritism, gossiping about coworkers, blaming coworkers, spreading gossip Personal hostility which is the Hostile or violent acts abusing others. Like sexual harassment, verbal abuse and coworkers cheating.

Workplace deviance in any shape or form should be avoided at all costs through organizational justice, the unfair treatment of employees or discrimination of employees create the feelings of hatred and jealousy causing them to act wild and against the company’s morals and rules, either actively or passively, acting a certain way to break the rules, harming others verbally or emotionally or even physically, creating a toxic environment through spreading bad words, damage the organization’s property and its equipment, or even remaining silence at these times. So, to avoid all of these a good manager should implement organizational justice and treat employees with what they deserve according to what they have provided the organization with.