SUMMARY OF DEVIANCE In the eighth chapter of “Sociology”, I. Robertson explains that there are many definitions about deviance but not enough, so he tries to find closer one and clarify the deviance. He starts with a question which is “who is deviant?” and lists of its answers. In the list of its answers, Robertson benefits from Simons’s tudy and he says that; “the words refer to people and acts that other people strongly disapprove of ” (23).
On the other hand, Robertson then counters it with conflicting topic of sociological literature. He claims that the concept of this definition is found slippery one by sociologists.
After this idea, Robertson questions second definition which is “deviance is any behavior that doesn’t conform to social norms” (24).
However, Robertson judges this definition as not helpful. He exemplifies that eating three meals in a day can be deviant behavior for some unimportant social norms. Therefore, Robertson argues that minor deviations aren’t included in the particular sociological interest. He claims that the main idea of sociological interest is about violations which are regarded as offensive by majority of people. And he says that one word is stigma – a bad reputation or disapproving by a lot of people.
After this analysis, he benefits from second definition and improves it, so he finally declares a definition, which is “deviance refers to behavior or characteristics that violate significant social norms and expectations and are negatively valued by large numbers of people as a result” (24).
The Essay on A Definition Of The Sociological Concept
Social change, in sociology, the alteration of mechanisms within the social structure, characterized by changes in cultural symbols, rules of behaviour, social organizations, or value systems. Social change is the significant alteration of social structures (that is, of patterns of social action and interaction), including consequences and manifestations of such structures embodied in norms (rules ...
He emphasizes that this definition clarifies deviance more than others. He continues with clarification of deviance by helping of main three points. Firstly, he claims that there is no close relationship between deviance and statistical rarity. He exemplifies that jogging before the breakfast can be unusual statistically but not a reason for deviance. However, Robertson then states that some norms can be modified or abandoned time to time.
He makes clear it with an example that premarital sex was prohibited in American society several years ago. However, nowadays the majority of American society admits this event normally. As a result, Robertson declares firmly that norms can lose their force or influence as time passes. Secondly, Robertson argues about division of “normals” and “deviants.” He explains briefly that there is no class between normals and deviants.
He illustrates that if we divide people as thieves, patients (mental disordered) or drug users, we will have a few “normal” people. In addition to them, Robertson says, “deviance is relative” (25).
He shows various examples to prove that deviance can change time-to-time, place-to-place and people to people. One of the examples is about group to group that someone can be a leader or freedom fighter for a group but he is “terrorist” for other group (PKK).
The other example is about place to place that if you talk with God in a church or mosque, it is normal but same event is abnormal in a supermarket or bus.
Robertson ends up with difference between lower class man and corporation president that if first man makes deviant behavior in the public, policeman will arrest him. However, if second one makes same thing, he will be bringing to psychiatrist for treatment. Consequently, deviance is a controversial issue that can change society-to-society or time-to-time. In the text, Robertson tries to present how deviance has different meanings.
In addition to this, he tries to prove it with examples. I believe that deviance is not stable is changeable and no one can blame for their behaviors.
The Essay on Implement Therapeutic Group Activities
WDP (Westminster drugs project) SU’s (service users) Participating in therapeutic group activities can benefit an individual’s identity, self-esteem and well-being in many different ways. For example during an open support group the chairs are set out in a circle and the service user will take a seat with his/her fellow SU’s and the group is facilitated by a trained practitioner. At WDP this is ...
