Abstract
For many years, there has been a protracted argument about whether deviance really exists. Some people argue that deviance exists in reality, while others argue that deviance is just a term invented by some people who would like to label others as such. Whether this is true or not is neither here nor there; what we are sure about is that some behaviors can be explained better using the labeling theory. The labeling theory argues that some people become the labels that people give them, and therefore it is good to be careful with the labels that we give to others – especially the young people. Once a label is given, fear and self rejection may set in and the individual perfects the label given to him/her.
Introduction
Behaviors are deviant only when the society labels them as so. Therefore, society’s conforming members who interpret particular behaviors as being deviant attach to individuals this label, and determine the distinction that exists between behavior that shows deviance and one that is non-deviant. The most important approach to understand criminal behavior and deviant is labeling theory. This theory begins with the assumption that there is no intrinsic criminal act, and it is only those in power who establish the definitions of criminality through formulation of laws and their interpretation. This makes deviance to be a context where criminality is interpreted. Labeling theory raises questions of why labels are applied, who applies to who, and the results of labeling. The most significant labels are however imposed by the powerful individuals in a society.
A lot of such rules which define deviance as well as the contexts where deviant behavior is labeled as being deviant are framed by men for women, wealthy for the poor, older for younger ones and ethnic majority for the minority ones. The more dominant and powerful groups in the society therefore make a creation and application of the deviant labels to the respective subordinate groups. For example, many children are involved in activities such as climbing into yards of neighbors, breaking windows, or even playing hook from school. These behaviors in affluent neighborhoods are regarded by parents, police and teachers as innocent aspects that happen during the growing process. In poor areas similar activities could be seen as being tendencies towards the juvenile delinquency. The labeled persons could include alcoholics, drug addicts, sex offenders, prostitutes, and psychiatric patients.
There are far reaching consequences of being labeled that range from low self-images, and from negative labels whereby individuals may end up rejecting themselves, to portraying more deviant behavior due to the label. Labels can formally be applied, by the social institutions like school and courts or can be informally applied by family, acquaintances and peers. Such labels can either be positive or negative. Negative connotations can be held by stigma which in turn affect the juvenile negatively are the main concerns of the labeling theory.
The most unfortunate thing is that those who accept labeling of others (whether correct or not) go through difficult time in changing their opinions of the persons that have been labeled, even when there is clear evidence of the contrary. After successfully labeling someone as a criminal or a deviant, the attached label may end up becoming dominant, and is viewed as being more important than any other aspects of the individual. Rather than the individual becoming a mother, father or a friend, he or she becomes a thief or hooligan. This is because after the deviant label has been put (in actual sense) it results to more deviance and the individual starts to act in the way that they have been labeled. This is common in schools where the students that are labeled by staff as bad effectively live under the label and some even revel in it. The youths who are labeled as delinquents or criminals hold the self-fulfilling prophesy by believing the labels that have been assigned to them, thus acting as the labels.
Most of the youths who succumb to labels proceed to act as so, abandoning the social norms due to the belief that one is a bad person and does what bad people are believed to be doing. In social labeling theory, there is a great role played by self-rejection that is brought about by self-fulfilling prophecy. The self-rejection attitudes results to conventional values commitments that are weakened and the juveniles acquire motives of deviating from social norms. This transforms the individual’s identity from evil doer to an evil person. In some instances an individual who has been labeled as deviant can be cut off from the society and live in a subculture which will further isolate him or her from the society at large. The labeled individual will later associate with others like him/her, and this will be like a shield from an entity that would offer some normality. It is, however, the society which certainly labeled the individual deviant and would (probably) not be willing to reabsorb the person because of the deviancy. The isolation will certainly push the individual to only survive through engaging in the criminal activities.
Every label contains unique images and prejudices and as a result other people may end up interpreting the labeled person’s behavior in a certain way. For example, it is worth of praise to an individual who voluntarily stays at work late. However, if the individual is labeled as a thief, other people could be suspicious that he or she might steal something. Therefore, apprehension for an individual’s deviant acts expose an individual to the likelihood that he/she will be regarded as undesirable or deviant even in other aspects. In this light, deviance is created by the society; social groups through establishing social rules create deviance, and whenever such rules are broken, the perpetrator is labeled as being a deviant and once the label is given, one becomes part of the generalization that follows the label. The label in a way acts as a self fulfilling prophesies to the victim of becoming part of the less desirable group. This in a way increases chances of engaging in more deviant behaviors.
When an individual is labeled for the first time for deviant behavior, it is primary deviance while the behavior that follows after being labeled is referred to as secondary deviance; reactions to the effects of being labeled. The deviant behavior social construction plays a critical role in the frequently occurring labeling process in the society. The process does not only involve criminality deviant behavior labeling, a behavior which doesn’t fit in the socially constructed norms, rather it also involves labeling which reflect on stigmatized or stereotyped behavior of the mentally disturbed individuals. There has been further controversy in the application of the labeling theory to homosexuality as there is big discrepancy between role and behavior attached to it.
Conclusion
Labeling theory highlights crime and deviance societal reactions. The theory has offered very useful insight into deviance process through practical or action approach. The labeling approach has some attraction where people are active agents in the social worlds. Label attachment therefore has consequences that are important for how other people see an individual and how the individual comes to viewing himself; a person will be required to accommodate to the spoilt identity in case of negative labels or stigma. Being discovered is therefore the most important step towards labeling because prior to the discovery, an individual is not labeled but when the individual indulges in the rule-breaking behavior labeling comes in. The deviant individual label can attach to his whole identity rather than a particular deviant act reducing chances of executing normal societal behavior.
Reference
Becker, H. S. (2006). Outsiders:Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.
Braithwaite, J. (1989). Crime ,Shame,and Reintergration. Cambridge,MA: Cambridge
Manders, D. (2005). Labelling Theory and Social Reality:A Marxist Critique. Insurgent
Sociologist 6 no.1 , 53-66.
O'Grady, W. (2011). Crime in Canadian Context. Ontario: Oxford University Press.
Sumner, C. (1994). The Sociology of Deviance:An Obituary. New York: Continum Publishing.
Tannenbaum, F. (2009). Crime and the Community. Boston: Ginn and Co.
