Textbook Notes (368,113)
Canada (161,656)
Sociology (1,755)
Kim Luton (5)
Chapter 1

chapter 1.doc

12 Pages
103 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Sociology
Course
Sociology 2259
Professor
Kim Luton
Semester
Fall

Description
Chapter 1- Determining Deviance - Who is deviant? - nuts, sluts, and perverts - criminals - important to focus on how people and concepts are deviant to society and its sociocul- tural processes, not just you personally - what/ who determines what is normal? - objective views of deviance claim that the presence of certain characteristics defines deviance - subjective views of deviance claim that there is no shared, observable characteristic that can clearly tell us who or what is deviant in Canadian society - distinction between objective and subjective is typically described as a dualism or di- chotomy, wherein objective and subjective represent 2 oppositional and mutually exclu- sive categories - however, recent shifts in definitions of deviance often go beyond this notion of objec- tive and subjective as mutually exclusive categories and instead combine aspects of both --> Objective/ Subjective Dichotomy - many contemporary ways of looking at deviance are blends of both objective and sub- jective approaches The Objective/ Subjective Dichotomy - objective side of dichotomy, and typically older view of deviance, is that there is some- thing inherently deviant in a person, behaviour, or characteristic - all deviants have something in common that enables us to recognize them when we see them - precise nature of that shared trait is a matter of debate - traits most frequently postulated include statistical rarity, harm, negative societal reaction, and normative violation - sometimes criticized by other deviance specialists, particularly those working from a subjective approach Statistical Rarity - one definition of deviance associated with the objective side of the objective/subjective dualism is based on statistical rarity - not a definition commonly utilized in academic research, popular usage in everyday talk - states that if a behaviour or characteristic is not typical, it is deviant - difficulty in determining the criterion for rarity illustrates one of the limitations of this definition of deviance - second limitation is that some behaviours are not statistically rare, but are still per- ceived as being unacceptable in the larger society and are subjected to control efforts - thirdly, we must also consider that there are many rare behaviours or characteristics that are not considered deviant in Canadian society--> ie. left-handed people, sports prodigies, physically active people - since there is this contradiction and limitation, some deviance specialists propose it is more than the statistical number of people who engage in a specific behaviour that de- termines its deviancy, whereas some believe the harm an action or behaviour causes there also causes it to be deviant Harm - 2nd definition of deviance associated with the objective side of the objective/subjective dichotomy is based on the concept of harm - if the action causes harm, then it is deviant - most obvious type is physical harm, either done to others or oneself - emotional harm can also be done to others and oneself - certain behaviours constitute social harm because although not directed at a specific person, they interfere with the smooth running of society as a whole - finally, harm may be directed at something far more abstract and ethereal than a per- son or society; harm may occur in the form of a threat to the way we understand the world and our place in it - historically religious belief systems have frequently provided us with a means of ab- stract understanding on a large scale - when something is perceived to threaten the fundamental assumptions upon which so- ciety is built, it may be considered deviant - seems self-explanatory that physical harm would be easy to define, but highly influ- enced by societys views ie--> at one time smoking wasnt considered bad for you, and masturbation was considered a massive health risk- also common has been exaggerated claims about the dangers of marijuana use, lead- ing to its criminalization in 1923 - when it comes to the idea of interfering with the current social order, or threatening a belief system or world view, the limitations of defining deviance by virtue of harm be- come more evident - first, whether or not society or a belief system is being harmed can be subjective - if something changes society, is it harmful? ie. feminism - many limitations on using harm to define deviance, therefore rarely used in academic literature - it is recognized tho that harm, or perceived threat or danger is one of the characteris- tics of deviance - Lianos (with Douglass, 2000) proposed that being merely viewed as harmful is what is most significant to the study of deviance Societal Reaction - if the general pop responds negatively rather than positively, then the person or act be- ing responded to is deviant - inconsistencies in public beliefs and laws reveal that law, and more broadly, deter
More Less

Related notes for Sociology 2259

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit