Societal vs Situational Deviance

Work of Ken Plummer

• Ideas clearly influenced by Becker
• Relative
• Homosexual
• Interactionist

Societal Deviance

• Those attitudes, behaviours or conditions that are widely recognised to be deviant and are likely to be negatively reacted to by many (or, perhaps most) of society's members.
• Examples include murder, infanticide (Killing a child at birth), necrophilia, rape, paedophilia, grooming

Situational Deviance

• Where a group defines its behaviour as non deviant, even though such behaviour is considered societally deviant!
• Hence, different subcultures and groups develop norms of behaviour which are at odds with wider society. The behaviour is neutralised and is viewed as acceptable in the subcultural setting. E.g. Swinging, cross dressing, use of drugs, etc. 

Back to 'relativity':

• As with other forms of deviance, Plummer's distinction still allows for a degree of relativity.
• What is not societally deviant may be situationally deviant.
• For example, kissing in certain contexts, failing to belong to a certain religion, club or youth movement, using profanity etc.

Because of the variety and relativity of deviance Interactionists, in some ways provide the best definition. They argue that whether an act is deviant depends not on the act itself but on people's reaction to it.

Back to 'Social Construction'

• Q/ How do Interactionist views fit in with the notion of a 'social construction'?
• Litmus test = if the phenomenon or activity being assessed is changing and not static, it is likely to be a 'social construct'. This being particularly true if it changes across time and location or between cultures.
• (Opposed to a 'social fact' which is universal and unvarying (positivist concept))

Hagan (1984)

• Canadian Criminologist
• States that what we regard as formally and informally deviant is determined by society at large.
• For example, making something which has been viewed as informal into formal if enough people think it should be i.e. stalking, cyber bullying. And vice versa, down grading of cannabis

Deviance is constructed out of 3 measures of seriousness

1. The degree of agreement about the wrongfulness of the act
2. Severity of the social response elicited by the act
3. Societies evaluation of the harm elicited by the act

Illustrative Examples:

• 9/11- an act which undoubtedly scared America and permanently altered the way we live and see the world in its aftermath; Western society was united in the way it saw the extreme wrongfulness if the act; and there was a severe response as a result.
• Cloning- an act which causes social divisions; there is a disagreement on the harm this causes; and as a result its wrongfulness is debatable.

Summary

• Deviance is a continuous variable- it constantly changes shape and nature.
• It does this because what is deviant is determined by society.
• Therefore, deviance is a SOCIALLY CONSTRUCTED term
• Thus, crime and deviance are RELATIVE terms; there are subject to change across time and location!