Social Reaction and Deviant Labeling: A Critical Analysis
Social Reaction and the Labeling of Deviance
The Focus of Social Reaction or Labeling Theory
Rejecting genetic, psychological, or multifactorial explanations of crime and deviance, labeling theory emphasizes the social construction of deviance. This perspective highlights the relative nature of social norms and the impact of labels applied to those who violate them. What is deviant for one person may not be for another, and what is considered deviant in one context may not be in another.
Labeling theorists argue that attempts to control and punish deviance can inadvertently create more deviance. The act of labeling someone as “deviant” can alter their self-perception and lead to further deviant behavior. While many individuals may engage in occasional rule-breaking, it is the social reaction to these acts that solidifies a deviant identity.
Primary and Secondary Deviation
Lemert distinguishes between primary and secondary deviation. Primary deviation refers to initial acts of rule-breaking that have minimal impact on the individual’s self-concept. Secondary deviation, however, occurs when an individual internalizes the “deviant” label and adapts their behavior accordingly. This often happens in response to negative social reactions like scorn, condemnation, and stigmatization.
For example, someone labeled a homosexual may face job loss and strained family relationships. These consequences can reinforce the deviant identity and lead to further engagement in homosexual behavior, not out of initial desire, but as a response to societal pressures.
The Role of Choice in Deviance
While some argue that deviant acts are impulsive, labeling theorists like Lemert emphasize the role of choice. A teenager stealing “on a whim” may become delinquent only after being labeled as such. The act of stealing might be driven by excitement or material desire, but the label of “delinquent” transforms the individual’s self-perception.
Becker argues that joining a deviant group increases the likelihood of persistent deviant behavior. The individual learns to avoid detection and finds support for their actions within the group. This reinforces the distinction between “rule-breakers” and “deviants.”
Ascribed and Acquired Deviance
Mankoff distinguishes between ascribed and acquired deviance. Ascribed deviance is assigned to individuals regardless of their actions, often based on physical or visible traits. Acquired deviance results from actions that warrant the label. Mankoff uses these distinctions to critique labeling theory, arguing that while social reaction is a prerequisite for ascribed deviance, it is not a sufficient condition.
Deviance as a Challenge to Authority
Much deviant behavior can be understood as a reaction against societal norms and authority. This challenge is often rooted in structural inequalities and ideological consensus. Understanding deviance requires examining the power dynamics and social structures that shape individual behavior.