Soc 380

As promised, here’s your lecture.

In studying deviance, there are two main theoretical perspectives used by sociologists: postivism and constructionism.

Positivism is characterized by an objective view of humans and of deviance. It postulates that humans can be studied in a similar fashion as other objects, like rocks. According to positivism, deviance is a thing in and of itself – some acts are inherently deviant. The theory is quite deterministic; a person’s environment and outside influences lead them to engage in deviant behavior. Positivist sociologists tend to study criminal deviance – that is, acts that are deviant because they go against formal social norms (the law), e.g. murder, rape.

Constructionism is much more subjective, emphasizing the need to account for human will and choice in studying deviance. In particular, constructionist sociologists insist that deviance is simply a label that society places on certain actions; therefore the important things to study are the labelers and the effect of labeling. Constructionists look more at law enforcement and how people can be mislabeled as deviants than at what causes people to engage in “deviant” behavior. They tend to study noncriminal deviance, or smaller crimes, e.g. gambling, prostitution.

Positivist theories

Anomie-strain theory / Goal-means gap (Robert Merton): Society encourages people to achieve success without providing equal opportunities for achieving it.

Anomie-strain theory / Status frustration (Albert Cohen): Lower-class individuals are unable to succeed in the middle-class world (particularly public education), so they create their own rules of success among their lower-class peers in direct opposition to the values of the middle class. This leads to the formation of a delinquent subculture.

Anomie-strain theory / Differential illegitimate opportunity (Cloward & Ohlin): When faced with the goal-means gap, the type of deviance that is likely to be embraced by an individual depends on the type of illegitimate opportunities by which the individual is most confronted. Criminal subculture – theft. Conflict subculture – gangs. Retreatist subculture – drug use.

Social learning theory / Differential association (Edwin Sutherland): If an individual associates with more people who are deviant than those who are not deviant, that individual is likely to also engage in deviant behavior.

Social learning theory / Differential identification (Daniel Glaser): If an individual associates with and identifies with more people who are deviant than those who are not deviant, that individual is likely to also engage in deviant behavior.

Social learning theory / Differential reinforcement (Burgess & Akers): If an individual has been rewarded for engaging in deviant behavior in the past, that individual is likely to continue to engage in deviant behavior. In particular, individuals who have been exposed to deviant ideas more than to conventional ideas are likely to begin engaging in deviant behavior.

Control theory / Social bond (Travis Hirschi): Most of us have a strong bond to society which ensures our conformity to social norms. We bond to society in four ways. Attachment to conventional people and institutions. Commitment to conformity, or time spent performing conventional actions. Involvement  in conventional activities that leaves no time for deviant activities. Belief in the moral validity of social norms.

Control theory / Reintegrative shaming (John Braithwaite): Society controls us through shaming us for our misbehavior. Disintegrative shaming involves punishment that stigmatizes the individual. Reintegrative shaming strives to bring the individual back into conventional behavior.

Control theory / Deterrence doctrine: Legal punishment deters crime, and must be appropriately severe, certain, and swift in order to deter would-be deviants.

Constructionist theories

Labeling theory: Those in power label the less powerful as being deviant. Once an individual has been labeled deviant, that individual is more likely to perceive himself as a deviant and therefore engage in deviant behavior.

Phenomenological theory: Deviant behavior can only be understood from the subjective interpretation of the individual engaging in such behavior.

Conflict theory / Legal reality: Law enforcement favors the rich and powerful over the poor and weak.

Conflict theory / Social reality: The dominant class in effect produces crime by creating and enforcing laws that target the subordinate classes.

Conflict theory / Marxism: The exploitive nature of capitalism leads to deviance and crime.

Conflict theory / Power theory: The powerful are more likely to engage in profitable deviance because they have weaker social control and greater access to deviant opportunities (white-collar crime).


New job

After two sessions of my once-weekly Deviance & Social Control class, I’ve decided to give up my law school plans in favor of becoming a sociology professor. I will do so for only one reason: to prove to myself that I’d be a better teacher than my current professor is.

This is THE MOST PAINFUL class I’ve ever taken. I absolutely dread going. The material is interesting enough, but the teacher…you remember the Pride & Prejudice quote, “[T]he commonest, dullest, most threadbare topic might be rendered interesting by the skill of the speaker.”? Opposite effect here. The class period is 2.5 hours, so we should cover a lot of material. On the syllabus we were scheduled to go over the first 3 chapters of our textbook. After 2 hours, we’d just finished the first chapter.

It’s not that we necessarily spend a lot of time going over one topic. The professor just can’t focus. He loves to tell stories, to give advice, and to recommend books and subjects. For example, one ten-minute tangent was about the importance of a good letter of recommendation for graduate programs. No, this isn’t a senior-level course, and no, this isn’t a class about getting into (or preparing for) graduate school. I try really hard to pay attention for the entire lecture, but when the teacher is actually covering material, he reads right off of the PowerPoint, and despite my best efforts I’m not getting much out of everything else he says.

Sigh.

Anyway, as proof of my sincerity about this new job (or not), tomorrow I’ll give you tonight’s lecture in an efficient manner. It may not be interesting. But it will be to-the-point. Valuable?


House of Many Ways

by Diana Wynne Jones

{ 2008 | Greenwillow Books | 416 pgs }

Last year when I was trying to finish up my reading challenge, I got a couple books on the Kindle and wasn’t sure which ones I’d end up using. I decided to count The Familiars for E and J since it was co-authored, which meant I still had House of Many Ways left over. My classes have started out very, very slowly, so I was able to read House of Many Ways this past week.

The book is advertised as being a sequel to Howl’s Moving Castle; I think a more accurate description would be that it takes place in the same universe, and takes some of the major characters (although they are minor characters in House of Many Ways). The story had an odd pace to it. For a long time, it seemed to not be going anywhere, but towards the end it picked up desperately. That being said, it was great for filling my “spare time” (ha).

Our main character is Charmain, a young woman who’s led a sheltered, respectable life. She goes to house-sit for her distant relative(-in-law), a famous wizard. His house has many ways.

You know I’m not likely to give any further summary of a book I liked. House of Many Ways is definitely recommended, even if you haven’t read (or seen) Howl’s Moving Castle.