hello everyone and welcome back I thought for purposes of the next two chapters I would combine them into one talk they're both on theory but Theo has divided them into two chapters 2 & 3 well if you remember talking about positivist and constructionist perspectives in Chapter 1 Theo pulls those two general ideas apart in chapters 2 and 3 and gives specific theories under each perspective in those two chapters and as I mentioned I've combined both chapters into this one talk so know that this one will be a little longer than other sections will cover but it does make more sense to have one section on theory I think and here we'll be covering specifically in this talk as I mentioned we'll be talking about kind of drilling down a little bit more in positivist perspective and constructionist perspective and then three theories under them the quote of the day is from President John F Kennedy talking about conformity conformity as the jailor of freedom and the enemy of growth we talked a lot about deviance and conformity in this class I thought that was a good kind of jumping-off point here okay so let's start with chapter two's area on positivist perspectives of deviance so just to kind of take a step back and review a moment a positivist perspective if you remember from chapter 1 assumes that there is a general set of norms of behavior of conduct of conditions of norms overall that we generally all agree on things are generally black or white right or wrong and so on and everyone knows those things so let's get started by talking about chapter two's theories looking at the positivist perspective specifically as you see there three theories that are the most prominent way is to look at deviance from a positivist perspective so what I'm going to do in this section is talk with you about the original that was the original individual that was credited with the original theory and then you're gonna read on your own some of the newer updated ideas built on that original theory so let's start out with particular order a Nomi theory sometimes called strain theory and let me start by telling you a little story to kind of illustrate this theory then the story is about the man that you see pictured on the top there so in April 1992 young man from a very wealthy East Coast family hitchhiked all the way to Alaska and walked alone into the wilderness of Mount McKinley four months later his decomposed body was found by a party of hunters so who was he well his name turned out to be Christopher Johnson McCandless he had grown up like I said in a very wealthy suburb of Washington DC where he was a great student he excelled academically and he'd been a star athlete so right after graduation from college graduated with honors from Emory McCanless kind of dropped off the grid he dropped out of sight he changed his name he gave all of his money about twenty four thousand dollars to charity he abandoned his car most of his possessions and literally burned all the cash in his wallet and then he invented a new life for himself he kind of lived out on the streets a lot he wandered around North America saying that he wanted to have sort of a raw back-to-nature experience he his family had no idea where he was or what had become of him until his body turned up in Alaska so this is from the 1996 that you see here on the right titled into the wild some of you may have actually seen the film it's a little older now about ten years old but a really good one by the way if you haven't seen it with Emile Hirsch that's the the poster for the film there on the right so the story of McCandless is a true one he grew up in a very conforming upper-middle class family and was on the straight and narrow seemed to be on his way to success he graduated from a really good college very high GPA talked about going to law school but instead he turned his back on well everything he took the name I told he changed his name he took the name Alexander Supertramp and set out to make his way in the wilderness all by himself so how can we explain this huge turnaround by an individual by Matt McCandless and his absolute complete rejection of society's norms and society's expectations would he'd grown up believing and was supposed to acquire well what we're gonna look at now enemy or strain theory is among the first real theory about deviant behavior although Theo doesn't go this far back in his how he describes enemy the term enemy actually got its start with Emile Durkheim you might remember him in the 19th century there he is up on the upper right so let's back up for a second and review exactly what enemy is so as I mentioned Durkheim coined the term he came up with the term enemy and he defined it as a breakdown or absence of social norms or values when I was an undergrad school and we studied enemy we often called it normlessness meaning and think about it nor lessness or a society without norms would be pretty confusing and pretty alienating we need norms as we've talked about because why they give a structure they give us purpose and Durkheim believed that enemy happened when often times when societies would undergo social change and usually rapid social change like what will like the pictures here like war everything gets upended in war a natural disaster like a tornado that you see pictured here like a mass shooting it's like a disease outbreak something that sort of happens almost from nowhere and throws the entire society in turmoil okay so that's enemy in a nutshell and if you understand the definition of enemy you probably can expand it to understand the theory enemy theory but let's look a little deeper so now you know what enemy is that why is this theory of deviance called enemy theory well Robert Merton man up on the upper left there whom you might remember from intro sociology or other sociology classes that you've taken Robert Merton was a big scholar of Durkheim he read and studied Durkheim and he studied this idea of enemy from Durkheim and actually expanded upon it so what did what was Martin saying well what Merton said was that enemy happens when there is a disconnect a disconnect between cultural goals and the legitimate means to achieve them what are we talking about well Merton said yeah we're all socialized in society to one success but when he looked around he saw that not surprisingly and you already know this not everyone has the same opportunities to get that success and that disconnect at the bottom there the in the words of the Rolling Stones you can't always get what you want that disconnect according to Merton caused enemy or strain and the individual had to figure out ways to adapt to that enemy to that disconnect and according to Merton there were five general adaptations or ways to cope with that anomie or strain the key underlying all of this is whether one accepts or rejects the cultural goal of success and whether or not the choice is to try to get that goal using legitimate like okay lawful good ways of getting the goal or not-so-good not conforming so let's take a look at those five adaptations first conformity Merton believed this is the most common adaptation to enemy so what is conformity what are conformists well conformists accept the cultural goal of success they want to be successful and simultaneously they try to achieve that goal using legitimate means you probably right now are in some measure or another conformists most college students could be said to be conformist think about it you are probably in school to better yourself in some way or another to get it good or a better job to achieve wealth success and so on and you're definitely going about trying to get that goal using legitimate means which are go to college get your degree one could also try innovation think of that word innovate what Merton was saying here is that innovators accept the goal of success they want to be successful but they go about trying to become successful in an innovative air-quote way they go about it illegitimate li you could think of for example a drug dealer here he or she wants the success they want all the goodies the stuff that people want in life those goals that they go about it through selling drugs and illegitimate adaptation they innovate to get what they want third ritualism another of mertens adaptations this is actually the flip of innovators ritualists according to Merton give up the cultural goal of success or wealth attainment but they still continue to use legitimate means to make their living a lot of us are ritualists we are dedicated workers we do all the right things while also realizing we're probably never going to become really successful in any real way but we still do the right stuff fourth retreat ISM retreat ISM is an adaptation of those who have rejected both they've rejected the cultural goal of success I don't need success to want it and also the legitimate societal means Merton called these people the quote unquote true aliens of society for example the chronically homeless or serious drug addicts are examples here as is Christopher McCandless from the stalks from our chocks opening story he retreated he dropped out of society basically finally rebellion this is an adaptation that's often used by political deviants those who don't necessarily play by the rules of society and they work to change the system so rebels reject the cultural goal of success and they replace it with another goal Merton said that rebels will use oftentimes whatever means necessary to achieve their chosen goal terrorist groups would be a good example here who often use violence in an attempt to achieve political goals but they could also be people you see here who start entire social movements Gandhi the Black Panthers any kind of rights organization civil rights women's rights gay rights and so on to other more recent updates and additions to enemy and strain theory are covered in your text and you should read them on your own so make a note of that and they are Albert Cohen who looked at status frustration and glowered and olan we've looked at differential illegitimate opportunity so take a look at those on your own and of course like any theory there are critiques of enemies string theory so you should also take a look at that section particularly the two issues that Theo has with enemy theory even with the critiques of enemy theory to explain deviance mertens writing about it social structure and enemy remains one of the most widely read and cited articles in all of sociology and criminology ok moving on another important theory of deviance in the positivist perspective is social learning theory by the title social learning you should have some indication of what we're talking about here so what's the simple overarching idea of social learning theory well deviance and deviant behaviors are learned behaviors just like many of us who learned and internalized the appropriate societal norms through our interactions did the right thing you can also learn the from whom from what well the same places you learn conformity from your family from friends from media so on fairly simple idea right as you'll see in your text there are three prominent social learning theories I'm going to cover one the one that's probably the first and best known theory and you're going to read the other to make a note of that on your own okay if you're talking about social learning theory relative to deviance you have to talk about the theory that we're talking about here that's that you see in this slide known as differential Association theory it was developed in the 1940s by the gentlemen you see there edwin sub sutherland excuse me so what's it about well basically Sutherland theorized that if people associate with others who are deviant or criminal what well they're more likely to become deviant or criminal like the gang members that you see here conversely if an individual is around people who are more conforming they're more likely to be what conforming like the Boy Scouts here seems pretty basic right well Sutherland actually broke it down more specifically into nine general propositions which you'll see in your reading there are a few big picture things takeaway ideas with differential Association theory first and maybe most importantly deviance is learned and it's learned how well through social interactions through associations with others and this learning through social interaction Sutherland wasn't talking about learning from just anyone out there Sutherland maintained that this learning was was with people from what he called intimate personal groups in other words the people you're closest to yeah you learn all day long from different people in your life but for example if your mom embezzles from her employer and tells and teaches you no big deal it's fine they won't miss it everyone does it I'm owed this whatever that's gonna mean something to you and Sutherlin would probably say that that kid will have a much greater likelihood of stealing then someone who grew up with a mom who always walked the straight and narrow that learning about embezzlement the actual socialization that it's okay from your mom it's different than learning about embezzlement for example from something you read in the newspaper or saw on TV or some random person in your town that does it also Sutherland was talking not just about who you have different associations with but how many of those associations so you might have probably do associations with people that are close to you that are both deviant and conforming but Sutherland believed that would tip the scales and effects your propensity to be deviant is whether there are simply more deviant acts that you're exposed to than conforming acts so yeah who influences you is very important but also the more or less number of deviant acts you're exposed to so that's social learning in a nutshell take a look at the other two learning theories differential identification and differential reinforcement along with the critiques of those theories and last but not least in the three positivist theory control theory so the basic idea behind control theory again pretty simple if you stick with the name of the theory deviance is caused by a lack of social control or restraint so control theorists argue that people are at their heart antisocial everyone walking out there walking around out there is antisocial they say basically everyone is deviant and they assume that deviance is part of a natural the natural order of society individuals according to a control theorists are attracted to violating norms and are motivated to deviate and so people are going to deviate it's natural according to control theorists the issue is that these people people overall have to be properly controlled deviance has to be socially controlled in society yeah everyone's gonna do it everyone's going to deviate but we'd better have some things in place to control it and to curtail it so conformity happens because of those social controls that are put into place and without those proper social controls deviance and more deviance like this image here this woman here according to control theorists she's doing what everyone does not paying attention while she's driving she's doing a whole lot of stuff she's putting mascara on and she's talking on the phone she's having her breakfast control theorists would say we kind of all do that probably at one time or another but what we have to do is have controls or sanctions to stop this common behavior so we have state patrols that are looking out or whatever so the big question here because it's so integral to the theory is what are those social controls that can help bring about conformity and minimize deviance well in your textbook Theo talks about the two most prominent sub theories of control theory and that is social bonds and shaming so read both of those I told you this is a big section okay now we've taken a look at the three prominent positivist theories now as far as constructionist theories so for review about what constructionism actually is according to our talk about deviance from Chapter one so a constructionists assumes that the definition of deviance is socially constructed and based on interactions in society the norms are more relative using this kind of perspective according to this way of looking at deviance behaviors conduct norms are not in and of themselves inherently deviant rather they become deviant when the definition of deviance is applied to them when they're labeled deviant a constructionist is going to be less interested in why certain people violate norms like a positivist would be but instead would ask how these norms get constructed where do the norms come from anyway how did we come up with these norms and these kind of rules in society so two Biggie's in the constructionist Theory repertoire labeling theory and conflict theory let's start here like you see with labeling Theory again with the title labeling theory you probably get an idea of where we're going it has to do with labeling so the idea with labeling theory is that basically deviance is in the eye of the beholder so deviance is a status that's imposed on an individual a person or group by whom do you think well labeling theorists argue that the more powerful you are the more likely you are to label or define what's deviant and to label those who are less powerful as deviant overall where there are controversies when and whether someone should be considered or labeled deviant power power is the key element that determines determines the label of deviant people with power will be better able to do two things according to labeling theory first they'll be in a much better position powerful people will be in a much better position to impose that label of deviant on others that are less powerful than them and second what do you think well not be labeled deviance themselves the illustration that you see here on the right who would be labeled deviant both are using drugs but a wealthy person snorting a line of cocaine at an upscale party might just be having a good time while a person on the street smoking crack might get that label of drug abuser and sanctioned and penalized as such so a cornerstone of labeling theory is the idea that deviant labels are not just random but rather are more likely to be given to those who are again less powerful who are disadvantaged who are minorities who are poor and so on marginalized groups another important component of labeling theory is that once you've gotten that label of deviant what do you think's liable to happen well it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy meaning being labeled deviant by society makes people think of themselves as deviant and they often live up to that label by what being more deviant if you were going to diagram the labeling theory in its simplest form it would look something like the bottom left you're labeled deviant you take on the role of deviant and then you commit more deviance so that's the basic idea behind Lea in theory and you can read more in VO on to number conflict theories note that there is more than one conflict theory I'm going to give you kind of the overall idea behind conflict theory and you'll read the individual sub theories that come under that large umbrella of conflict theory on your own so if you take a step back in time and remember back in your intro sociology days and just conflict theory overall you're halfway there conflict theories are often also referred to as Marxist theories named after the conflict theory guy himself in the middle there Karl Marx you probably remember that at the core of conflict theory and Marx's ideas overall was a focus on society that is inherently conflictual mostly why it's comes because of inequality and power differentials Marx generally believed that societies were divided into two classes the ruling class and the worker class or the haves and the have-nots or the booze huazi and the proletariat and things like social class and racial and other forms of discrimination Marx believed they were promoted by the ruling class the wealthy class the class in power to basically keep others in line and to keep them controlled so that's the kind of big overarching idea of conflict theory in general now how does that apply to our theory of deviance well mainly in five broad ways first deviance in society is as I mentioned before based on power and resource inequalities and they're basically considered to be inevitable in every society those inequalities lead to deviance and often lead to crime street crime and corporate crime second what is considered deviant isn't again random rather the key to being able to define something as deviant rests on power who's got it sound familiar labeling theory we just talked about right same basic idea so you can have someone who is relatively power less be considered deviant or a drunk because they drink on a street corner that a powerful man can drink you know his $200 bottle of wine in his fancy living room and escape that label of deviant 3 the systems of social control in society in the system I'm talking about things like the criminal justice system psychiatrists counselors religious officials so on the systems of social control in society often uphold and help the interests of the powerful rather than those of the poor or marginalized so those social control systems in society maintain that power differential for the root cause of deviance is a capitalist system which is at its base unequal and often ignores the needs of the poor and the marginalized it's not surprising according to a conflict theorists that the poor often turn to things like crime and forms of escapism like booze and drugs and suicide and 5 according to a conflict theorist ultimately the solution to most deviance a conflict theorist would believe lies in making a more just and equal society that's the only way to really ultimately deal with deviance in society is to make more equity in society you've got to address the gap between the rich and the poor in order to have any chance of solving deviance according to a conflict theorist Theo covers six sub categories of conflict theory so take a look at those alright that about covers it for today make sure that you read the parts that I've pointed out to you along the way in this talk these are areas once again that I didn't cover in this talk so you need to take a look at them on your own ok that's it for today have a great one see you again soon bye bye