ACTIVITY/PROMPT #1: What is Deviant?

Use THIS DOCUMENT as the basis for this discussion. Once you have completed the exercise outlined in that document, post your answers to the following questions to discuss with your peers:

1. How many total items are in your “deviant” and “not deviant” lists? For the deviance list, post (with ranking numbers) your top 3 MOST deviant acts and your 3 LEAST deviant acts.

2. What criteria did you use when determining whether or not something is deviant and when ranking the severity of the deviant acts? Why? Be specific.

3. How did you “know” the ways you categorized things as deviant or not deviant was correct? What might be some of the larger implications of the ways we categorize/define deviance in society?

ACTIVITY/PROMPT #2: A Class Divided: Applying Deviance Theories

Watch the ONLY the first 17 minutes of the video “A Class Divided” (see the module for the link) and then post your answers the following questions to discuss with your peers:

1. Provide a 1-2 sentence summary of this film.

2. What agents of socialization are highlighted in this film? (just a list is ok!)

3. Which theories of deviance can be used to explain the events in this film? Explain how. Be specific.

PROMPT #3: General Thoughts

This space is for general discussion and/or questions about the module. What, if any, questions do you have about the various theoretical explanations sociologists have developed to explain deviance in society? What new insights have you gained from the material this week? What information was most interesting to you this week – why?1 attachmentsSlide 1 of 1

  • attachment_1attachment_1

UNFORMATTED ATTACHMENT PREVIEW

2/21/21 Deviance Instructor: Melissa Day 1 How do we know socialization works? Deviance & Social Control 2 1 2/21/21 Deviant? How Deviant? List (in order) 10 MOST deviant acts * * * * * * * * * * * * * Skipping school Running away from home Driving a car without a license Mouthing off to your parents Stealing an item worth less than $2.00 Stealing an item worth $2.00 – $50.00 Stealing an item worth more than $50.00 Drinking beer, wine, or liquor Smoking marijuana Dressing like the opposite gender Using cocaine Having a hangover Being so drunk you can’t remember the next day what you did or said * Taking office supplies from your employer * Cheating on a class exam or assignment * Sticking chewed gum to the underside of a desk or table * Smoking cigarettes * Spanking a child * Driving above the speed limit * Cutting the line * Urinating in public * Purposefully damaging private property * Passing gas in public, and blaming the dog * Texting while driving * Being expelled from school * Littering * Divorcing your spouse * Standing still in the middle of a busy walkway 3 Deviance: the violation of norms * All deviance is relative * Cultural and historical contexts matter * Howard Becker (1966): “It is not the act itself, but the reactions to the act, that make something deviant.” * Social life is comprised of social norms, so being deviant is very common – even normal * Crime is the violation of norms that has been written into law * Engaging in deviance does not necessarily make one a deviant * Enforcement of social sanctions is what makes deviance a crime or not * Considered threatening because it undermines social order * the predictability to social life that all cultural members depend on * Remember….Shared Meaning = Social Order 4 2 2/21/21 Sanctions * Positive: approval for following a norm * good grade, allowance for doing chores, a smile or approving nod, a raise, etc. * Negative: disapproval for breaking a norm * failing grade, getting grounded, staring, gossiping, getting fired/expelled/arrested 5 Sociological Explanations for Deviance Symbolic Interaction •Stigma •Labeling Theory •Differential Association •Control Theory Structural Functionalism •Functions of Deviance •Strain Theory Conflict •Role of privilege and inequality in defining deviance and crime 6 3 2/21/21 Symbolic Interaction Focuses on… * How people use symbols to create social life * Micro-level analysis 7 Labeling Theory How do people come to be identified as deviant? • Explains the significance of reputations and how they set us on paths that propel us into or divert us from deviance • We internalize labels and then act out our lives based on this identity – becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy • E.g., “pervert,” “cheater,” “whore,” “stupid,” “deviant,” “criminal,” etc…. 8 4 2/21/21 Stigma: Labels are Powerful * Discrediting labels to a person’s identity as a “normal” member of society * Mark of social disgrace Can be applied to understanding labels of: * Convict * Having a disease (e.g., HIV/AIDS) * Mental Illness * Adulterer/Adulteress * Homosexuality Remember: Always in cultural and historical context! 9 Differential Association Theory How do people learn to conform or deviate? * We learn to deviate from or conform to society’s norms via the different groups we associate with – especially primary groups Conform * A small group characterized by cooperative, long-term, face-toface interaction * Balance of our socialization by the many groups we interact with can “tip” us in one direction or the other Deviate 10 5 2/21/21 Control Theory Why do we mostly conform and not just cut loose? * Our inner and outer control systems work against our tendencies to deviate * Inner Controls: conscience, religious principles, ideas of right/wrong * Outer Controls: people who influence us not to deviate (e.g., family, police, friends, etc.) * Theory posits that the stronger our bonds with society are, the more effective our inner controls are * Emphasizes personal responsibility, but in the context of our social ties 11 Control Theory Why do we mostly conform and not just cut loose? Bonds include: * Attachments – respect and affection for conforming people * Commitments – having a stake in society you don’t want to risk (e.g., place in family, education, job, etc.) * Involvements – participation in conforming activities * Beliefs – convictions about right/wrong 12 6 2/21/21 Related Sociological Scholarship… Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) 0 Studied ways social forces affect peoples’ behavior 0 Suicide Study – compared suicide rates of many European nations and found patterns 0 Males > Females 0 Protestants > Catholics or Jews 0 Unmarried > Married 0 Members of groups w/high rates have weaker social ties and less social integration 0 Social Integration: degree to which individuals are united by shared values or bonds 0 Suicide is not an isolated individual decision to take one’s life, instead social forces underlie suicide 13 Durkheim Updated 2 C A R S E Y SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY FIGURE 1. MORTALITY FROM DRUGS, ALCOHOL, AND SUICIDE VARIES SIGNIFICANTLY BY RACE AND SEX (AGES 25–54) Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files 14 disorders and suicide. For example, research demonstrates that blacks are less likely than whites to have substance use disorders and internalizing disorders like depression and anxiety. Factors like anger, hostility, depression, and loss of control over one’s life are also more strongly associated with a wide variety of poor health outcomes among whites than among blacks.8 Though deaths from drugs, Among young white men (age 25–34), deaths from drugs, alcohol, and suicide exceed those of the next ten leading causes of death combined, including accidents, heart disease, cancer, homicide, and diabetes. White males made up just 29.5 percent of the young adult population in 2010–2014, but they accounted for a remarkable 57 percent of all drug, alcohol, and suicide deaths in this age group. deaths, and 20 percent of young Hispanic female deaths were attributable to drugs, alcohol, or suicide. In twelve states, over half of all deaths among young white adults in 2010–2014 were due to drugs, alcohol, or suicide (Figure 3). In the early 2000s, the share of deaths among young white adults due to these causes exceeded 40 percent only in Utah. Drug, alcohol, and suicide deaths make up the 7 2/21/21 Durkheim Updated C A R S E Y SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY 3 FIGURE 2. SUBSTANTIAL SHARE OF DEATHS ARE DUE TO DRUGS, ALCOHOL, AND SUICIDE, 2010–2014 C A R S E Y SCHOOL OF PUBLIC POLICY 3 Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files 15 FIGURE 2. SUBSTANTIAL SHARE OF DEATHS ARE DUE TO DRUGS, ALCOHOL, AND SUICIDE, 2010–2014 FIGURE 3. DRUGS, ALCOHOL, AND SUICIDE WERE THE CAUSE OF OVER HALF OF DEATHS OF YOUNG WHITE ADULTS (AGE 25–34) IN TWELVE STATES, 2010–2014 Durkheim Updated Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files FIGURE 3. DRUGS, ALCOHOL, AND SUICIDE WERE THE CAUSE OF OVER HALF OF DEATHS OF YOUNG WHITE ADULTS (AGE 25–34) IN TWELVE STATES, 2010–2014 Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files Source: CDC Underlying Cause of Death files 16 8 2/21/21 Structural Functionalism Focuses on… * How parts of a society work together to maintain equilibrium (or create dysfunction) * Macro-level analysis 17 More from our friend… How is deviance functional for society? Emile Durkheim (1858-1917) 0 Deviance is functional for peoples’ lives The Functions of Deviance: 0 Clarifies moral boundaries & affirms norms 0 Encourages social unity 0 Promotes social change 18 9 2/21/21 The Functions of Deviance How is deviance functional for society? Two Types of Functions: Deviant? * Manifest: intended * Latent: unintended 19 SOURCE: PEW Research Report (April 14, 2015), “6 facts about marijuana” 20 10 2/21/21 SOURCE: PEW Research Report (April 14, 2015), “6 facts about marijuana” 21 22 11 2/21/21 SOURCE: https://www.vox.com/2018/6/27/17508694/marijuana-legalization-canada-oklahoma-vermont-2018 23 Functions of Marijuana Legalization Latent * Federally illegal – “Schedule 1” Drug * Issues w/ banking, taxes, etc. * Economic opportunity * Saturation of market with product drives down prices (good for consumers, not for sellers – makes it so scale of operation matters) * Opportunity is limited to bigger operations * Policing – events, enforcement of laws * Local adjustments to zoning laws, etc. Manifest * Substance is decriminalized * Substance is legal * Crime rates lower * Economic opportunity in communities/states * At end of the first year of legalization sales for medical and recreational use totaled $700 million * Tourism 24 12 2/21/21 When norms and structure don’t match up…. * Structural Lag: the tendency for the social structure of roles, norms, and social institutions to change more slowly, and thus lag behind, changes in peoples’ lives 25 Strain Theory How do people respond to cultural goals and the legitimate means to achieve them? * Functionalist theorists argue that crime is a natural outcome of conditions that people experience * Especially in an Industrialized Nation (U.S.) the key function of society’s institutions is to socialize individuals to preform the key roles/skilled work in society * To get the most talented people to compete with one another, to find the “best fit for each job,” society tries to motivate everyone to strive for success. * Cultural Goal = success and wealth = American Dream! * The way to achieve cultural goals is through culturally approved institutionalized means 26 13 2/21/21 Strain Theory How do people respond to cultural goals and the legitimate means to achieve them? * But, remember “ideal culture” doesn’t always = “real culture” * As a culture, we don’t do a good job of providing everyone access to the institutionalized means….hence, strain theory * When a society socializes a large number of people to desire a cultural goal (e.g., success), but withholds the approved means of reaching that goal to some * Explains the frustration people feel when mainstream norms do not help them get ahead * Feel wronged by the system and “choose a deviant path” – might be rational, but still deviant * e.g., street selling drugs when it’s the only job in town * e.g., drug or alcohol abuse or suicide 27 Conflict Theory What is the result of competition and inequality? Focuses on… * Society is defined by the struggle for scarce resources between groups * Ways elites use power to control the less powerful * Macro-level analysis 28 14 2/21/21 Karl Marx (1818-1883) 29 Social Inequality in the U.S. Today * Forbes Billionaires 30 15 2/21/21 Americans’ Perceptions of Wealth Inequality 31 How Wealth Inequality Is Dangerous for America 32 16 2/21/21 Infant Deaths 33 Mental Illness 34 17 2/21/21 Teen Births 35 Trust 36 18 2/21/21 Homicide 37 Drug Use 38 19 2/21/21 Imprisonment 39 A Snapshot of U.S. Growth Mass Incarceration Prison T he United States incarcerates * The U.S. 5% of moremakes people than up any country in the world, including the far more populous the world’s population nation of China. At the start of the new year, the American penal system held more than 2.3 million and houses 25% of the adults. China was second, with 1.5 million people world’s prison population behind bars, and Russia was a distant third with 890,000 inmates, according to the latest available figures. Beyond the sheer number of inmates, America also is the global leader in the rate at which it incarcerates its citizenry, outpacing nations like South Africa and Iran. In Germany, 93 people are in prison for every 100,000 adults and children. In the U.S, the rate is roughly eight times that, or 750 per 100,000.2 (See Appendix A-7 for additional international analysis.) * Highest incarceration rate in the the world 40 To produce a fresh portrait of incarceration levels at the start of 2008, Pew conducted a survey of inmate counts from the states and the federal government. Our finding: the U.S. prison population rose by more than 25,000 inmates in 2007—a 1.6 percent rate of growth that brought the national prison census to 1,596,127. Although the 2007 expansion didn’t match the 3.1 percent hike during 2006, the growth tracks projections3 and continues a pattern of steady expansion that has characterized the U.S. penal system for more than 30 years. PRISON COUNT PUSHES UP Between 1987 and 2007, the national prison population has nearly tripled. 2.0 million 1,596,127 1.6 1.2 0.8 0.4 0.0 585,084 NOTE: 1987-2006 data are year-end prison counts from the Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2007 figure is Pew Public Safety Performance Project’s count as of Jan. 1, 2008. 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 SOURCES: Bureau of Justice Statistics; Pew Public Safety Performance Project 1 in 100 Adults Behind Bars The consequences of that upward trend are many, but few can rival this: more than 1 in 100 adults is now locked up in America. With 1,596,127 in state or federal prison custody, and another 723,131 in local jails, the total adult inmate count at the beginning of 2008 stood at 2,319,258. With the number of adults just shy of 230 million, the actual incarceration rate is 1 in every 99.1 adults. That statistic masks far higher incarceration rates by race, age and gender. A separate analysis of 20 2/21/21 “1 in 100” report (Rates: Lower # = higher rates of incarceration for that group) TABLE A-6 1 in X: Incarceration Rates by Sex, Race/Ethnicity, Age & State All Black Hispanic All White All White All ages 18+ 18-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-54 55+ Source: All data are from BJS, “Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2006,” or reanalysis thereof. 133 102 101 53 53 54 63 76 153 837 245 194 191 103 104 92 104 124 266 1249 41 29 36 17 17 17 19 24 45 264 96 64 85 41 43 47 55 66 101 383 72 54 57 30 30 30 36 43 83 391 Men Women Black Hispanic All White Black 136 106 107 60 59 53 61 71 148 588 21 15 19 9 9 9 10 13 23 115 54 36 47 24 26 27 32 38 55 184 746 580 833 345 333 270 265 352 893 8333 1064 859 1235 453 443 343 355 500 1333 11111 Hispanic 279 203 382 157 140 108 100 125 307 3571 658 436 571 289 328 300 297 358 709 3846 For example, this cell indicates that 1 in every 115 black males 55 years or older was behind bars on June 30, 2006. STATE INCARCERATION RATES, 2005, BY QUINTILE 41 Wash. 465 N.H. 319 Mont. 526 N.D. 359 Minn. 300 Ore. 531 Idaho 784 Nev. 756 Wy. 690 S.D. 622 Wisc. 653 Utah 466 Calif. 682 Ariz. 808 Colo. 728 Ill. 507 Kan. 582 Texas 976 Md. 636 W. Va. 443 Va. 759 R.I. Conn. 313 544 N.J. 532 Del. 820 N.C. 620 Tenn. 732 Ark. 673 La. 1,138 (highest) Pa. 607 Ohio 559 Ind. 637 Ky. 720 S.C. 830 Miss. 955 Alaska 705 Mich. 663 Mo. 715 Okla. 919 N.M. 782 Mass. 356 N.Y. 482 Iowa 412 Neb. 421 Maine 273 (lowest) Vt. 317 Ala. 890 Ga. 1,021 Fla. 835 Hawaii 447 Inmates per 100,000 residents Lowest fifth Second lowest Middle fifth Second highest Highest fifth SOURCE: Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Prison and Jail Inmates at Midyear 2005” 34 One in 100: Behind Bars in America 2008 42 21 2/21/21 Recidivism * Released convicts who are rearrested * Within 3 years of release: Tossed into a competitive labor market, former inmates are viewed suspiciously by many * 62% are rearrested prospective employers. They bear the indelible stigma of incarceration that ranks them low on any list of job candidates, and face a number of laws barring them from working in * 52%certain areoccupations. re-incarcerated Finally, while some employers might be inclined to hire a former 26 inmate, many are dissuaded from doing so by potential legal and financial liabilities.27 INCARCERATION AND WORK * Why??? 43 Former inmates experience relatively high levels of unemployment and below-average earnings in large part because of their comparatively poor work history and low levels of education.28 Incarceration further compounds these challenges. When age, education, school enrollment, region of residence and urban PAST INCARCERATION residence are statistically accounted for, past incarceration reduced REDUCED SUBSEQUENT WAGES subsequent wages by 11 percent, cut annual employment by nine weeks BY 11 PERCENT, CUT ANNUAL 29 and reduced yearly earnings by 40 percent. (See Figure 4.) EMPLOYMENT BY NINE WEEKS AND REDUCED YEARLY EARNINGS BY 40 PERCENT. Interestingly, when number of years of work experience also is statistically controlled, the estimated effect of incarceration on all of the above outcomes does not change much. This implies that incarceration’s effect on economic outcomes has much more to do with having been convicted and imprisoned than it does with the work experience lost while imprisoned. In other words, having a history of incarceration itself impedes subsequent economic success. Marx – Economics Matters FIGURE 4 INCARCERATION REDUCES EARNINGS POWER Estimated effect of incarceration on male wages, weeks worked, and annual earnings, predicted at age 45 48 weeks $16.33/hr. $14.57/hr. 39 weeks $39,100 $23,500 If not Postincarcerated Incarceration If not Postincarcerated Incarceration If not Postincarcerated Incarceration WAGES WEEKS WORKED ANNUAL EARNINGS Source: Original analysis for The Pew Charitable Trusts by Bruce Western and Becky Pettit, 2009. 44 COLLATERAL COSTS: Incarceration’s Effect on Economic Mobility 11 22 2/21/21 Summary of Theories of Deviance Symbolic Interaction *symbolic and normal Structural Functionalism Labeling Theory How do people become identified as deviant? (labels/stigma) Differential Association Theory How do people learn to conform or be deviant? (socialization, especially from primary groups) Control Theory Why do we mostly conform? (strength of social ties determines conformity) Functions of Deviance How is deviance functional for society? (affirming, unifying, progressive) *a natural outcome Strain Theory of societal conditions How do people respond to cultural goals and the legitimate means to achieve them? (Conformity or Deviance) Conflict *intentional, Conflict mechanism that maintains power of the ruling class What is the result of competition and inequality? (Deviance) Who decides what is deviant? (Ruling Class) 45 A Class Divided Watch First 17 mins of: *A Class Divided: Brown Eyes, Blue Eyes *Post answers to the following: 1.Provide a 1-2 sentence summary of this film. 2.What agents of socialization are highlighted in this film? 3.Which theories of deviance can be used to explain the events in this film? Be specific. 46 23

Do you similar assignment and would want someone to complete it for you? Click on the ORDER NOW option to get instant services at essayloop.com

Do you have a similar assignment and would want someone to complete it for you? Click on the ORDER NOW option to get instant services at essayloop.com. We assure you of a well written and plagiarism free papers delivered within your specified deadline.