Deviant Conduct

Deviant Conduct An individual's behavior is labeled as "deviant" when the behavior goes against the prevailing norms that govern social life. These norms are generally unspoken rules designed to promote patterns in the social interactions between people. This gives rise to expectations about how people must act and behave. Those who do not conform to these expectations are therefore considered "deviant." Generally, there are three main areas covered by unspoken social norms. The first area concerns appearance - one's clothing, hairstyle, personal grooming. This also extends to material possessions.

In Western society, in particular, people reveal much about themselves by their choice of cars, houses and jewelry. The second area of social norms concern manners. These include how we relate to others on an interpersonal as well as a group level. Personal manner norms concern areas like proxemics, the typical distances people maintain during face-to-face interactions. Group style norms are generally dictated by membership in a social group, as determined by factors like one's gender, socioeconomic status and race. The final area concerns norms relating to conduct.

These include rules regarding authority, individual obligation and account-giving. These rules vary according to time, across different cultures and even within the same cultures. While these norms change over time, one constant is that these norms change. Concomitant to this, the definitions of what constituted "deviant" behavior is also constantly changing. Furthermore, studies have shown that what constitutes "deviant" behavior is often influenced by time, socio-economic status and other social and even biological factors. For example, most cultures today have strict norms against cannibalism.

However, James Henslin (1991) recounts the unusual case of the Uruguayan soccer team whose plane crashed into the Andes. Because of the lack of food, the survivors had to eat the human flesh of the dead passengers. As proof of the deep-rooted norms against cannibalism, many of the survivors had to force themselves to eat, despite their need for nourishment and self-preservation. In addition, although their account was well publicized, their behavior was not labeled as deviant.

This contrasts sharply with accounts of serial killers like Jeffrey Dahmer, who supposedly ate some of the body parts of his victims. Because Dahmer's actions were committed under very different circumstances, his cannibalistic behavior served to further define him as a horrible deviant, who presented a great danger to society. William Chambliss (1973) also chronicled how socio-economic status affects perceptions regarding deviance. Chambliss studied two groups of delinquent boys from the same high school.

Chambliss found that though both groups were guilty of behavior such as vandalism and truancy, one group of boys was generally labeled as the "saints," while the others were viewed as "roughnecks." The police, educators and townspeople were generally more tolerant of the behavior of the saints, while the roughnecks were often harassed and thrown in jail for being troublemakers. The only difference between the groups, Chambliss found, was socio-economic class. While the saints came from stable, upper-middle class families, the roughnecks were from the lower-income side of town.

Later studies have shown that race and gender also affect perceptions of deviant behavior. For example, the fact that African-Americans are over-represented in death row leads to claims that the legal system penalizes deviant criminal behavior of black people more than that of other races (Jackson 2000). This dichotomy is also caused by gender. Studies show, for example, that promiscuity is more tolerated among men, while a promiscuous woman is labeled as a "slut." This labeling often has long-reaching effects on an individual's life.

Chambliss (1973) found that the boys who were labeled as deviant "roughnecks" eventually ended up with lower-paying jobs or in prison. The social acceptance of the saints, on the other hand, ended up with well-paying jobs and enjoyed social prestige. In his study of delinquency, Michel Foucault (1977) found wrote that the concept of "delinquency" is a social creation largely of the current prison system. Though not ideal, the delinquents are infinitely more preferable to the "other illegalities" which existed during the time, such as roving bands of thieves or revolutionary mobs.

The prison system has created a new area of jurisprudence, by isolating the less harmful delinquents from people who commit greater illegalities. Thus, despite over 150 years of supposed failures, Foucault observes that "the prison system still exists, producing the same results, and there is the greatest reluctance to dispense with it" (232). The prison represents an important social control, one that society imposes on those who violate its norms regarding criminal conduct.

In the case of criminal behavior, deviants are seen as threats to other people's welfare and to the general good of society. For example, the main difference between the deviant behavior of Jeffrey Dahmer and that of the Uruguayan soccer team is that Dahmer could conceivably kill again. The cannibalism of the soccer team, on the other hand, was committed under extraordinary circumstances. The degree of perceived danger to other members of society often governs how people react to deviant or nonconformist behavior.

Therefore, depending on the geographic area, a man who chooses to wear women's clothing in public is generally tolerated. At most, his behavior may incur ridicule or amusement. However, a man who kidnaps and molests children presents a clear threat and is therefore dealt with as a criminal deviant. This distinction can get blurry with social movements. In the early 20th century, for example, many Suffragettes were thrown in jail and suffered public ridicule for agitating for a woman's right to vote. Margaret Sanger was.