HKU SPACE COMMUNITY COLLEGE



HKU SPACE COMMUNITY COLLEGE

INTRODUCTION TO SOCIOLOGY

COURSE CODE: 337

CLASS CODE: 20

Essay Topic: Crime and Deviance

Topic: Crime or deviance is just a label.

NAME: SO Sin Yee

STUDENT ID: 10252176

Lecturer: Miss Veronica W. Lai

INTRODUCTION

If you do not have money and you feel very hungry, will you steal food? Some people think that they should not do so because stealing is a crime or deviance and immoral while some think that keep alive is most important and otherwise they will die. Actually, there are a lot of behaviours that people will hold different point of views and some even label the others. Why do these happen?

Let’s look at the meaning of deviance first? It has many definitions (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:186) and can change over time and place. One of the sociological views clarifies deviance as the infraction of some agreed-upon rule (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:186). And one of the sociologist, Talcott Parsons, defined deviance as behaviours that are not acted in a specific way which is greatly accepted and expected in the society (Thio 1995:4). Howard S. Becker also claimed, “Deviance is not a quality that lies in behaviour itself, but in the interaction between the person who commits an act and those who respond to it” (Haralambos1995: 406). An act only becomes deviant when others perceive and define it as such (Haralambos 1995:405). So, if someone is being labelled as deviant, it is applied by social groups who make the rules or norms.

Some people think that labelling can help to stabilize the society. As Kai Erikson writes, when some people are being labelled, this will let us know what are accepted in the society and what are not. This can strengthen the social coherence (Thio 1995:49-50).

However, some rules and negative labels are nonsense and I do not think those behaviours are wrong or immoral. For example, the new immigrants labelled as not intelligence and lazy and just wait for social assistance. Actually, not everyone likes this, but we tag them all. Also, women cannot go into sanctum is unfair in today society. These cannot keep the society stable. So I absolutely think that crime or deviance is just a label. Most of them are just like us. Their reasons are always not strong enough to give them negative labels.

Labelling Theory

Labelling theory, in interactionist perspective, is one of the most important approaches talk about deviance. It defines deviant as a process of interaction between deviants and non-deviants. Howard Becker thinks that deviance behaviour is not the determining factor, but rather, some unrelated processes affect the behaviour (Giddens 2002:210). Edwin Lemert also said that deviance is defined by social reactions and that the frequency and character of deviation, together with the role of deviant (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:183). Labelling theorists would like to find out why some people have the “deviant” label and the effects of it. And they found out that labels are applied by the people who have power, like the wealthy, men, older people, and social control agents or journalists to the others like the poor, women, and younger people. For example, if the affluent children steal fruit or play truant, parents, teachers and police treat them as innocent pastimes of childhood. Otherwise, if they are the poor children, they labelled as delinquent, criminal and untrustworthy (Giddens 2002:209-210). And we can see that not everyone who breaks the rules get labelled deviant (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:183). If people are being tagged, most people expect them to continue violating norms of conventional behaviour. Maybe they will fulfill their label by doing the deviant behaviour. As a result, they cannot get jobs and return to crime again (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:185).

EXAMPLES OF LABELLING

There are a lot of labelled people that do not have big differences with the others actually, for instance, mentally illness, homosexuality, divorces, and unmarried-mother. Different place and time have different definition and thus different groups of people being labelled. They may be just tagged because they are the minority and powerless groups. Let’s take mentally ill as an example.

Mentally illness

In the early period, people think that mental illness is caused by evil. And people did not treat them as human being. Nowadays, public also have the negative attitude towards them. People think that they are extremely weird, crazy and violent (Thio 1995:253). They are labelled as “dangerous, dirty, unpredictable, and worthless” (Thio 1995:268-269).

In fact, mentally ill is very common. National Mental Health Association (NIMH) found that 2.4 to 2.6 millions Americans suffer from schizophrenia. And 19% adult, around 35 millions have mental problems. In an early study, it even finds out that 80% of us have impaired mental health in some extents (Thio 1995:252). Moreover, Public always misunderstand the more serious mentally ill people and labelled them as “deviant”. Most of the people think that they are extremely weird, like screaming and yelling, talk to air, or masturbating in front of others. But actually, there are only a small amount of inmates in mental institution like this. Also, they are labelled as crazy and danger towards others. The truth is most would hurt themselves rather than the others. In addition, around 70% to 80% hospitalized mentally ill people will get well and have the life like us (Thio 1995:253). And according to Thomas Szasz, a psychiatrist, mental illness is just “a problem in living”, “a moral conflict in human relations”, or “a communication expressing some socially unacceptable idea” (Thio 1995:282). He thinks that their behaviour is normal, which react to the abnormal environment (Thio 1995:282).

However, there are still label on mentally ill. Who label others people? Why do they label others? And what are the effects?

Who create and apply label and who are being labelled

Becker said, “Social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitutes deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders”. So, if a person has strange behaviours, they are categorized and being labelled as mentally ill by the social groups, especially the doctors and psychologists.

Mass media is one other usually label the people who have psychological disorders (Haralambos 1995:409). It strengthens their images to the audience. For example, in the film, if the mentally ill people are being labelled, they must be crazy and danger and they need to go in the mental hospitals. However, the mental institutions are actually the other place reinforcing the label. Patients’ self-concepts were taken away and standardized when they go in by removing the clothes, possessions, and applying new “identity kit” like regular clothes (Haralambos 1995:409).

So the mentally ill people, who have behaviours out of the norms, were labelled and applied by the psychologists, the mass media and the institutions.

Why label is applied

Labels, like mentally ill, create categories of deviance thus express power structure of society (Giddens 2002:209). Assigning labels is often a mark of success in that particular job and gain some advantages. (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:184). For example, psychologists look like professional if they treat the mentally ill patients; and films get more profit by tagging them. Labelling, thus, help the labellers and the deviant even more distinctive, and confirm the label.

The labelling benefits the people who have power and tagged others, like psychologists and the film makers.

The effects of labelling

There are different effects on the labelled people, the publics, and the labellers.

Labelling has great effects on the tagged people. It can lead to further deviance, and can even change individual’s self-concepts. For example, after they are being labelled and released from the institutions, they may find jobs and friends. But most of them cannot, because they learn the life in the institutions, and because they labelled as “ex-mental patient”, they always rejected by the employees and friends. They are difficult to re-entry into the conventional society. And they accepted their label and think that they are hopeless and hapless (Haralambos 1995:408). Edwin M. Lemert also claims that the secondary deviation, which means the response of the individual or the group to societal reaction (Haralambos 1995:409), explains that the individual accept the label and sees themselves as deviant, and continue the deviant acts (Giddens 2002:408). They may self-fulfilled by perceive themselves and perform as what other label them—mentally ill (Haralambos 1995:406).

Labelling not only influences the individual’s sense of self, but also how others, like general publics, see an individual (Giddens 2002:210). According to labelling theory, other people will see and treat the mentally ill person in terms of the label. They may be rejected by employees, family, and friends (Haralambos 1995:406), since people expect they continue having mental problems, even they released from the institutions.

From Erikson’s works, we can see that labelling others as deviant create positive consequences for the community, groups, or individuals that apply the label (Thio 1995:49). He writes, “And in doing so, he [the deviant] shows us the difference between the inside of group and the outside… in controlled quantities, an important condition for preserving stability.” These strengthened the social order (Thio 1995:50).

Although it can stabilize the society, labelling has great bad influences on reinforcing the deviant behaviours, like do not talk to others, done by the mentally ill.

As we can see, we have a lot of misunderstanding on mentally ill people and the effects on everyone are so big caused by the labelling. We should change our thought.

CONCLUSION

We found that the people who are involved, the reasons, and the effects on labelling people, by using labelling theory. It is really not fair to label the people who are actually not doing anything wrong but just doing things that do not much people did. Labelling theorists think that the solutions are to change the definitions to become more tolerant to them, and also, taken the profit out of labelling (Rubington & Weinberg 1995:185).

However, the labelling theory still has the limitations. For example, it cannot explain why people commit crime or deviance at the very beginning, and people actually are not so determine by the label (Haralambos 1995:410). Although labelling is not perfect, it has made an important contribution to explain crime and deviance, like telling others labelling may strengthen the effects and it is a social matter instead of an individual’s factor. So I still think that crime and deviant is just a label.

Reference

Giddens, Anthony. (4th ed.) 2002. Sociology. Polity

Haralambos, Michael and Holborn Martin. 1995. Sociology: Themes and Perspectives. London: Collins Edcational.

Rubington Earl and Weinberg Martin S.. (5th ed.) 1995. The study of social problems: seven perspectives. New York: Oxford University Press.

Thio, Alex. (4th ed.) 1995. Deviant Behavior. HarperCollins College Publishers.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download