Week 9 - Deviance and Youth

Q&A-Journal Entries

In your own words, explain what 'deviance' is?

Deviance occurs where there is an occurrence or a behavior that is outside the norm. The norm on the other hand is what regarded as normal by the society in which the deviance occurred. 

The funny thing about deviance is that what one person regards as a deviance may be experienced as the norm by another. There are many examples: The Moral Majority eg. was an US American organization that claimed leadership in Christian moral issues and representing those who were morally stable in the US. Another example is the extent to which people’s sexual orientation is regarded as outside the norm. While heterosexuality is regarded as the norm in western culture, homosexuality and bisexuality are still regarded as deviant though, the acceptance of devian sexual orientation has increased. An article in the Washington Post (Harris, 1965) showed that in the US over 70% of US Americans thought that homosexuals were more harmful than helpful to American life. Another survey taken in 1998-1999 (Herek, 2002, p. 52) showed that this number has dropped significantly and indicating that men as well as women feel more uncomfortable with homosexual people of the same gender. In my opinion this is an indicator for a more liberalized society. There are many other examples of constantly changing deviant perceptions worth exploring.

Reference

Harris, L (1965), “Public Registers Strong Disapproval of Nonconformity” September 27, p. A2,  Washington Post, Washington, PH.

Herek, G. M. (2002), GENDER GAPS IN PUBLIC OPINION ABOUT LESBIANS AND GAY MEN, Public Opinion Quarterly Volume 66:40–66, American Association for Public Opinion Research, Deerfield, Il.

What is the crucial insight of Becker's 'labelling theory' of deviance? 

Although these people may neither have committed a crime nor done harm in any way, they all have one thing in common – they are labeled as outsiders. Becker defines the outsider as an individual that is seen as a rule-breaker by a social group that the individual had a transaction with.

What is a moral panic?

 Moral panic was coined by sociologist Stanley Cohen’s book, Devils and Moral Panics. The Creation of Mods and Rockers (1972/1987). He defines the condition of moral panic as ‘a condition, episode, person or group of persons emerging to become defined as a threat to societal values and interests; its nature presented in a stylized and stereotypical fashion by the mass media, the moral barricades are manned by editors, bishops, politicians and other right-thinking people; socially accredited experts pronounce their diagnoses and solutions; ways of coping are evolved or (more often) resorted to; the condition then disappears, submerges or deteriorates and becomes more visible.’

Mass media have plaid a major role in constructing outbreaks of moral panic. The latest I can remember is the release of child molester Dennis Ferguson. Besides the understandable rejection from communities to have an individual around their children, media caused significant panic on his case after he was released from jail. (Gearing, 2009)

Reference

Gearing, A (2009), “A House for Dennis”, The Drum Unleashed, ABC, viewed 29 January 2011, < http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/27244.html>

Do they simply represent 'irrational fears'? 

I guess that by mentioning “they” you are talking about the media. My answer is that they do not simply represent irrational fears. I think that they pick-up on the general opinion of society on subject matter about individuals or groups that deviate from the mainstream and try to generalize the case and amplify it in forms of news and reports to their audience - the broader community. Further my experience specifically with TV-news and reports is that the more provocative the story, the higher the coverage. This seems to be distinctively the case with private TV-channels as they rely on as many viewers as possible in the aim to sell advertising slots, the reaction is more important than the story. 


Contribuion to Discussion Board

According to Davis, there is a struggle between 'baby boomers' and 'gen Xers' that is evident everywhere in contemporary culture. Do you agree with his claim? 

I agree with this claim, but I think this is an ongoing issue that will occur with every generation change. The significance of the struggle especially between these generations may be buried in the fast technological development that baby boomers might not be able to keep up with anymore, while modern technology to generation Xers is a means to an end for almost any situation in life. The general issue I see between any generation of parents and their young ones is that parents have to accept that these young ones are no longer happy about being taught. They want to make their own experience, and quite fankly, I can imagine that they would love to experience failing too, rather than being tucked in cotton wool, to prevent them from being exposed to this bad world full of threats and dangers (Media Panic).   

Why is youth so often connected with rebellion and society's anxieties about morality?

The Davis article perfectly represents what I think. It is tragic that obviously a lot of the baby boomers cannot reflect on their own youth. Otherwise they would have a lot more understanding for those they call Generation X (buy the way: the issues are exactly the same with Generation… ‘please, fill in your character of choice’).

Davis’ book Gangland was published in 1997. That is 14 years ago. Look at today’s problems of the so called Generation Y. It’s a perfect déjà vu of any other generation before them. The Hoodoo Gurus sang about a Generation Gap in 1988. What about Punk? Now, if that wasn’t rebellion? Today people in their 50s have magenta coloured strains in their hair and it’s absolutely normal. And what about 1958, when Bill Haley came to Berlin and rebellious youth turned the chairs of Berlin Sport Palace into firewood? History tells us that every generation has its history of rebellious youth. The differencemight be what they are rebellious about.

Looking at myself as a youth in the mid-70s to mid-80s I hated the idea of becoming just like my parents. I had naïve ideals, wanted to change the world and wanted to do things better than my parents. I went to rallies against nuclear power, against the cold war, squatted empty apartment buildings in Berlin and Hamburg and rejected basically anything that my parents valued. Parents are constantly worried about something. I thought their biggest concern was to be embarrassed by their sons and being rejected for what their children would stand for. This really hurt me and made me even more rebellious. 

More general speaking, I believe envy of youth and the feeling of losing control, over what the kids do outside parents control creates anxiety and concerns about moral in the heads of the older generation.