Mid-term - introduction to socialogy

3 Social Problems and Deviant Behavior

The most beautiful as well as the most ugly inclinations of man are not part of a fixed biologically given human nature, but result from the social process which creates man.

—Erich Fromm

Learning Objectives

By the time students complete this module they will be able to do the following:

1. Learn what constitutes a social problem from a sociological perspective.
2. Learn what deviant behavior is from a sociological perspective.
3. Identify the importance of positive and negative sanctions.
4. Analyze major sociological theories examining social problems.
5. Explore major sociological theories of deviant behavior.
6. Consider why certain activities are or are not considered social problems.
7. Consider why certain people are considered to be deviant while others are not.
8. Discover the relationship between social problems and deviant behavior.

3.1

 What Are Social Problems?

Social problems are macro-level conditions that undermine the well-being of some or all members of a society and are usually a matter of public controversy (Macionis, 2010). Social problems exist because people are not in agreement on (a) if certain things actually are problems, (b) why they are caused, and (c) what should be done about them.

Objective problems for a society can exist without them being perceived or addressed as social problems. What is identified as a social problem is a result of the social construction of how people perceive reality, and they reflect the values espoused by a society. Most social problems share characteristics that dictate if and how they are to be defined as problematic. Here are a key set of principles that help explain why certain types of issues are perceived as social problems.

Public Outcry

The issue must be perceived by the public to be of concern, and there must be a public demand for some action to be taken to address it. If there is no public outcry about a situation, problems may exist but not be considered of enough importance to do anything about them. The issue may be more swiftly addressed when it attracts the attention of influential people. Even if the problem has severe implications, it may be ignored until it gains the attention of people in power. Statistics and research are helpful tools used to bring the public's attention to a presumed problem.

Who Is Affected

The issue must affect a large number of people or people in a position of importance. If an issue is thought to be a personal problem, it will be perceived differently than if it is a public problem. If an individual's troubles are regarded as a personal problem, the individual is supposed to come up with his or her own solution to deal with it. If only a few people or collectivities of "unimportant people" are affected, the problem will not generate the same amount of concern or attention as something that is a widespread problem for many people. Often a social problem affects large numbers of people, such as environmental pollution. Other times a problem—e.g., poverty—may exist for a long time but not be identified as a social problem until certain groups are affected, as in the case of middle-class people during the economic downturn of the 2000s.

Value Violation Debate

The issue must be seen as counterproductive for society or for individuals. It may be thought to violate the values and ideals espoused by a society, and may be perceived to be wrong. Identification of something as a social problem clarifies a society's norms and values and reaffirms the solidity of the community. Society functions more smoothly when the rules are clear and there is a consensus about their implementation. Debate over whether something is a problem helps society clarify its values. Consider the issue of gay rights. The social process continues on whether same-sex couples should marry, adopt children, and be afforded the same legal rights as heterosexual couples. The debate helps society clarify its values.

Solution

Social problems evoke a moral or value imperative. The issue must evoke a sense that something could and should be done about it. There is a moral or value imperative involved. When a social problem exists, it is something perceived to be counterproductive but fixable. The problem should have a potential solution available. Responsible parties who can do something about solving the problem are thought to exist. Collective action or social movements may be seen as ways to motivate the responsible parties to implement actions that could prevent or ameliorate the problem.

Claims-making

In the recognition of a social problem, one group may try to convince another that there is a problem, while another group may seek to discredit those claims and counter them with new arguments. There are usually at least two sides involved in the identification of a social problem—otherwise everyone would have been in agreement on how to fix the issue and it would cease to be a problem. The creation of a social problem is a process. Usually one side in the issue benefits from keeping the issue the same while others advocate for change. Both sides may seek to persuade others of the rightness of their position. When there are competing interests or views about whether a social problem exists, and if so what should be done about it, each side will engage in a campaign to justify their position as the correct one. This may result in the public being confused about whether a problem exists, and what should be done about it. When there is widespread disagreement over whether something is a problem, there is less likelihood for consensus and action on what to do about it. Claims-making may be part of organized social movements. This is why use of the media and communications is of utmost importance in the creation of a social problem.

Temporal and Cultural Relativity of Social Problems

What is considered to be a social problem varies from time to time and place to place. Both objective facts and subjective feelings are associated with the construction of something as a problem. The identification of a phenomenon as a social problem occurs through a long process of social negotiation and ideological construction. What is considered to be a problem may vary across time and place. As an example of the issue of time, in the United States during Prohibition, alcohol consumption was thought to be a major social problem and its production was deemed illegal and immoral; today, alcohol consumption is normative and its production and distribution are major sources of income. As an example of place, in the United States the legal drinking age is 21, in Mexico and Canada it is 18, in some European countries there is no drinking age at all, and in some Muslim countries the use of alcohol is forbidden by anyone of any age (Hanson, 2011).

Example

Air and water pollution existed for many years in places without causing concern for the public. When only a few people were worried about pollution, it was not seen as a social problem. When large numbers of people became concerned about the consequences of environmental pollution, it became regarded as a social problem. People became concerned that pollution would have adverse effects on the ability of the planet to sustain life as scientific evidence became available. The environmentalists mobilized and found effective ways to make their concerns public, and advocates for change used the media and educational outlets to spread the message of the dangers of pollution. There were identifiable units that could do something about it—corporations that could change their practices and governmental structures that could change their laws to lead to improved air and water quality. The acceptance of pollution as a social problem reaffirmed the value and importance of taking care of air and water quality so that future generations would be protected. Environmental advocates, corporate leaders, and governmental officials have engaged in active processes of debate and negotiation in order to address the pollution issues. As a result, there are a variety of individual, corporate, and governmental actions to address the issue of pollution. But even today, pollution continues to exist because these groups are not in agreement about what should be done and the extent of needed protection.

     

     

3.2

 How the Study of Social Problems Helped Shape Sociology

As long as humankind has existed, people have confronted problems with which they must deal, such as having enough to eat, finding adequate shelter, being able to make enough money, or being mistreated. Sometimes their problems stemmed from individual causes and sometimes the problems were caused more by social influences. During the Industrial Revolution, social problems and deviant behaviors became a focus of sociological examination. During the 1800s, many people from various backgrounds suddenly came to live and work together in new communities in order to find lucrative employment. Given the speed at which the social change occurred and the vast numbers of challenges associated with it, it was logical that individuals would have different ways of thinking and different ideas about how people were supposed to behave. Interpersonal conflicts, health problems, and crime resulted. Organizations struggled with how to address these problems and human needs. Their challenges resulted in the creation of new social structures and norms. Sociology emerged as a distinct discipline during this time in order to help make the world a better place in which to live. Different schools of thought (theories) emerged about how best to analyze what was going on in society. More sophisticated research designs emerged in order to better understand the causes and consequences of problems. While early sociologists had existed, it was during this time that the field of sociology became recognized as a distinct scientific discipline.

3.3

 Why Do Social Problems Exist? Theoretical Explanations

Sociologists understand that the ways in which people view phenomena such as social problems depend on their theoretical perspective. Theory helps us comprehend why different groups may disagree about how they view social problems, but why they all believe they are right.

The Functionalist Perspective

Social problems are linked to disorganized societies by functional theorists.

The structural–functional theory focuses on society as a system of interrelated institutions and structures that are designed to address human needs. They view society as functioning best when there is agreement about the social values and norms. Early functionalist theories viewed society like they would a human organism, so if there was a problem, then it must be due to some sort of pathology. Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) (1851) used a social Darwinism approach to the study of society, and felt that people who became wealthy were more socially fit than those who were poor. He felt that poor people were deficient and more prone to both cause and experience problems. His views today receive little support because most sociologists consider the source of social problems to be at the society level, not within an individual. Rather, individuals are forced to deal with social and structural dysfunctions. Park and Burgess (1970) linked social problems not to deficient people but to disorganized societies. The notion that societies can be dysfunctional or functional remains an underlying premise in the field. Today urban planning is a major occupation so that cities can design themselves to promote positive human relationships and reduce the likelihood of social problems (Macionis, 2009).

The field of social problems is a study of how society manages situations and people who do things differently than the status quo. The analysis of social problems helps us understand how society operates. When groups of people are concerned about an issue, it may indicate that current practices may need to be evaluated or changed. As a result, social problems might result in social benefit. For instance, during the 1960s, some Americans regarded the Civil Rights Movement as a social problem, but it resulted in greater equality for people of all races. While the gay rights movement has challenged assumptions about values and norms, it has brought forward new debate on issues of equality, family, and love. In the environmental case discussed earlier, significant social benefits resulted from the creation of more stringent environmental standards. When there is public debate on whether something is a social problem, it facilitates the social construction of reality as members engage in dialogue and debate what is most functional for a society, and how a society should function.

The Conflict Perspective

The conflict theorists focus on social inequality and group conflict. They feel that most social problems emerge because our society is divided into those who have wealth, prestige, and power, and those who don't. Karl Marx (1818–1883) alleged that society was divided into two classes of people: the bourgeoisie, or rich, elite capitalist class; and the proletariats, or the underpaid working class (Bottomore, 1964). To Marx, most social problems were created because the wealthy focused on their acquisition of profit and power, which came about through the exploitation of the people. The division of people into different social statuses enabled elites to manipulate the social system so that the fruits of worker labor would be transmitted to them for their own financial good. They could effectively use the threat of firing or suing noncompliant workers to ensure their positions of wealth, prestige, and power. They would also be able to manipulate rules, policies, and the creation of laws that would favor their interests over that of the common person.

Modern-day proletariat.

In order to keep workers in their place and enhance the chances of their own economic and social benefits, Marx felt that the bourgeoisie had to also influence the ways that the proletariats viewed themselves. Marx (Bottomore, 1964) coined the term false consciousness to refer to the process by which people of lower classes internalize the views and values of the dominant class. Essentially, the dominant class can control the subordinate classes when messages that support the position of the upper class permeate the mindset of the lower classes. So long as the lower classes believe what the upper classes say is true, they will never challenge the status quo, and they will do precisely what the dominant class wants them to. This explains why Southern slaves didn't challenge their White slave owners, or why women felt their place was in the home, believing they were better suited to take care of children and the home than men are. When elites control the news and media industry, they are able to shape the public's opinion about itself and the nature of social problems.

Class consciousness impacts how we see ourselves and others, and it is a filter for how we interpret the world (Centers, 1949). It occurs when a group or class of people share particular views about the way people are supposed to be. Women may bond with other women because they have many experiences in common; African Americans may share similarities with others merely because they are dark-skinned; Jews may find a kinship with other Jewish people because they share a culture and faith; middle-class people view themselves in a way that is different than they view the rich or the poor. In each case, class consciousness creates a sense of solidarity, superiority, and in-group association with others who they perceive to be similar. It naturally results in creating a sense of otherness when viewing people who are perceived to be dissimilar, or out-group members. Elites, according to Marx, will manipulate the way people view themselves and others in order to ensure that their own positions of superiority are preserved. They may pit men against women, Blacks against Whites, Christians against Muslims, and the middle class against the poor when they think there may be a benefit to doing so. As this pertains to social problems, conflict between classes may be both the cause and consequence of group inequalities.

The Symbolic Interactionist Perspective

The symbolic interaction theory views society as the product of individuals' interaction with each other. Through the process of socialization, people learn values, attitudes, and actions that they deem to be correct. People are exposed to a set of reinforcements to maintain or change those views and actions. Learning theory helps explain why people view others in particular ways, such as who is good and who is bad. Our views may have little to do with objective reality. Learning theory may also explain the process in which people come to engage in behaviors that others find problematic, such as embezzling or prostitution. As Sutherland (1940) notes, people learn the motivations, beliefs, and actions to engage in behaviors that some may find problematic.

Labeling theory explores how people socially construct reality. People in positions of power and authority have the ability to label an activity as problematic or acceptable; people in lower social positions are less likely to persuade others to stick with their definition of the situation. This is why elites are able to define a situation that benefits them as good, while others may regard it as troublesome. It also helps explain why people in lower classes are more likely to be perceived as the cause of problems, and why elites escape that definition.

The reality of any social situation depends on how people define it. For example, when college students drink alcohol, is it partying, is it normal, is it binge drinking, is it alcohol abuse, are they a social drinker, a problem drinker, do they use it or abuse it? We may wish to determine how we will label the alcohol consumption based on when they drink, with whom they drink, how much they drink, what they drink, and what they do when they are drinking. Is the drinking a personal problem, a campus problem, or a social problem? These distinctions are determined arbitrarily through the process of labeling.

When it comes to the understanding of whether something is a social problem, the underlying conditions probably existed for a long time before it was identified as an issue. The disagreement over whether something is a problem, how much of a problem it is, what and who caused it, and how it should be addressed are all a product of social construction created through the process of interaction.

Table 3.1 Social Problems Theoretical Overview

	Functionalism	Conflict	Symbolic Interaction
Level of analysis	Macro	Macro	Micro
Cause of social problems	Structures are designed to be functional and may have related dysfunctional consequences	Socially structured inequality among groups of people results in the "haves" exploiting the "have nots"	Process of interaction and labeling determines whether something is regarded as problematic

Whose Side Are We On?

The sociological study of social problems and deviant behavior is an examination of what bothers us, what we decide to do something about, and what we decide to ignore (Becker, 1966). Issues such as immigration, health care reform, abortion, or gay rights are hot topics of conflict these days because well-meaning people on both sides perceive the problem and the solutions differently. When a social problem such as the effect of secondhand smoke gains public attention, it may be perceived differently if one lives in states where tobacco is a huge crop and source of income, as opposed to areas where few people earn incomes from tobacco. In another example, people with money troubles weren't seen as a social problem; only when millions of white, middle-class people began having problems paying their bills and the number of bankruptcies and housing foreclosures skyrocketed was it perceived as a social problem (FCIC, 2010). When the 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil disaster occurred, some people thought British Petroleum (BP) had been negligent and the government irresponsible for not mandating tighter controls on deep-sea oil drilling, while others felt BP had been a responsible corporation that had been financially generous to the people in the area (CNN, 2010). Which is it? It all depends on whose side you are on and how you perceive the situation. In another example of labeling theory and how it relates to social problems, is Walmart a good business because it provides lower-cost products and has many stores around the world, or is it a bad business because it may run out smaller, independently owned businesses and may buy cheap products made in foreign countries instead of supporting local producers? Whether it is a good business or a bad one depends on whose side you are on.

Blaming the Victim

Who is responsible for the creation of social problems? William Ryan (1971) points out that it is common to blame the victims for their own misery instead of looking at the more complex causes of social problems. Often it is more convenient for people to look at single-source, simplistic answers for a social problem instead of looking at the complicated interface of a multiplicity of social forces. Stereotyped reactions blame homeless people for their lack of housing instead of focusing on economic factors and a housing industry that has made having a house or apartment beyond the reach of many people. It is easier to blame people for being lazy and not trying hard enough to find a job than it is to blame communities where the jobs have dried up and there simply aren't jobs available. Ryan's work encourages us to shift from looking at symptoms of social distress, like the victims, and focus instead on the structural factors that are actually causing the personal woes.

     

     

3.4

 Common Social Problems

Many different kinds of social problems exist around the world. In this unit, the following social problems will be examined: crime, racial and ethnic inequality, gender inequality, and social stratification. Other problems may be examined as forms of deviant behavior. In the next module, problems facing social institutions such as education, governments, and health care will be examined. In the last module, global problems such as war, terrorism, and overpopulation will be addressed.

Crime

Murder and violent crime is decreasing.

Crime is the violation of the criminal laws enacted by local, state, and federal governments. Felonies are serious crimes that are punishable by at least a year in prison, while misdemeanors are less serious crimes that require less than a year in jail, and maybe only paying a fine. Crime is a problem for societies because it violates agreed-upon rules for how to live in a civil society. It may put individuals at risk, or put the interests of particular groups at risk (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2008).

What is considered a crime depends on the formalization of norms of a particular society. Criminal behavior may focus on universal taboos, such as murder or incest, but it can also focus on minor offenses such as jaywalking, types of clothing, manner of speaking, or overfeeding a child. Whether the laws are enforced depends on the situation, the perpetrator, the observer, and the victim. There are two major types of crime: crimes against persons and crimes against property. While people are seven times more likely to be the victim of property crime, people are usually more concerned about crimes of violence (Macionis, 2009). In general, crime has been decreasing in recent years (see Figure 3.1).

Crimes against the Person

Violent crime is a concern to everyone. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) crime index of crimes against the person includes murder, manslaughter, rape, armed robbery, assault, domestic violence, child abuse, hate crimes, and bullying. Teens and young adults are most likely to be the victims of violent crime, according to the United States Bureau of Justice Statistics (Klaus and Rennison, 2002). Violent victimization rates were inversely related to household income; persons living in households with lower incomes generally had higher rates of violent crime. Data indicates that both violent and nonviolent crime in the United States has gone down in recent years (Department of Justice, FBI, 2010). As shown in Figure 3.2, violent crime has dropped significantly in recent years.

Figure 3.1 Year-to-Year Decreases in Crime (2007–2010)

FBI crime data shows year-to-year decreases in major categories of crime.

Murder. Murder is an intentional, unlawful killing of one person by another. The U.S. murder rate has been falling since 1993 and is at the same level as it was in 1960. Most murder victims are male, younger, and of the same race as the murderer. Most victims knew their assailant. Types of murder may include individual murder; mass murder, where four or more people are killed at one time and place; or serial murder, the killing of several people by one offender over a period of time. Manslaughter is the unintentional, unlawful killing of one person by another. As a result, people convicted of manslaughter often receive less harsh penalties because the death was an accident.

Figure 3.2 Violent Crime in the United States

2009 data showed that crime had been decreasing over the previous five years.

Rape. According to the FBI, a female rape occurs every six minutes. Most victims know their attackers, but police make arrests in only 27% of the cases. Data on male rape victims is less definitive, but some researchers have found they experience greater physical injury than females (Macionis, 2009).

Assault. Aggravated assault is the most frequent type of violent crime and is most likely to be a crime in which both the victim and perpetrator are male. Police make arrests in over half the cases (Macionis, 2009).

Robbery. Robbery involves stealing and threatening another person, making it both a violent and a property crime. Usually the victim does not know the perpetrator. It is the least likely of all crimes to result in an arrest (Macionis, 2009).

Hate crime. Hate crime refers to a violent action directed towards a disliked person or group of people. Common victims of hate crime include people of different races, religions, ethnic groups, sexual preferences, or nationalities. The FBI began studying hate crimes with the lynching and cross-burning activities of the Ku Klux Klan, but the term "hate crime" was not used until the 1980s, when emerging hate groups like the Skinheads launched a wave of bias-related crime. Most hate crimes go unreported.

Family violence. Domestic violence is violence aimed at a spouse or intimate partner and may include physical, sexual, emotional, financial, or social assault. Child abuse consists of the physical, sexual, emotional, or verbal assault on a child by another family member. Elder abuse includes maltreatment of elderly family members. Elder abuse may also be inflicted by people in caregiving roles. The numbers of family violence victims are almost always gross underreports of the actual amount of abuse. It is also a difficult-to-prosecute set of crimes.

Gangs. Many communities are concerned about gang violence. According to the National Youth Gang Center, gangs are extremely misunderstood social groups (Howell, Egley, & Gleason, 2002). No two gangs are the same, no two communities have the same type of problem, and the public often has a distorted, sensationalized sense of them that does not reflect reality. Youth may emulate "gang" behavior in an attempt to gain attention and admiration and posture in order to scare away potential attackers. Many different types of gangs exist, including prison gangs, drug gangs, motorcycle gangs, and youth gangs. Most of them are loosely structured and not well organized. The composition of gang members varies considerably, and while members are often portrayed to be minority males, members may just as likely be Whites, females, and a wide mix of race and ethnicity. While gangs may be seen as problems, understanding their social dynamics is a useful way for societies to manage the members (Greene & Pranis, 2006).

Gun control. Gun use is directly correlated with crimes of violence. Gun ownership is a controversial issue in the United States; about half the homes in the nation have a gun inside, while the other half are opposed to having a gun present, especially if there are children. The United States has the least restrictive laws on handgun ownership of any industrialized nation in the world. Lax gun control laws are often associated with high rates of gun violence; nations that have fewer guns and stricter enforcement of laws appear to have a lower rate of violent crime. Guns are involved in over 70% of murders and about half of robberies in the United States (National Education Association Health Information Network, 2010).

Crimes against Property

Figure 3.3 Declining Crime Rates in the United States

Violent crimes and property crimes declined in 2009 compared to 2008. The Decline of Crime Even in Tough Economic Times. (FBI, 2009).

The majority of crimes are not against the person, but against property. The FBI crime index includes burglary, larceny, theft, arson, shoplifting, vandalism, money laundering, car theft, and electronics theft, to name the major forms. Defacing public property and the painting of graffiti are also considered property destruction. Property crimes, like crimes against the person, have been declining in recent years according to FBI data (see figure 3.3). Because in most types of property crime the victim never sees the perpetrator, arrests are only made in 16% of crimes, compared to 43% of reported violent crime (Macionis, 2009).

The most common types of property crime are burglary, larceny, theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. Over two million burglaries, or cases of breaking and entering, were recorded in 2005, with the average loss per incident around $1,700. Larceny theft includes shoplifting, pickpocketing, theft from a car, or bicycle theft. It is the most common type of property crime. Car theft has declined in recent years; the most common offenders are young males. The rate of arson has remained steady in recent years, with most offenders being male and under age 25 (Macionis, 2009).

White Collar Crime

Bernard Madoff, convicted of a Ponzi scheme fraud.

White collar crimes are criminal activities by people of high social status who commit their crimes in the context of their occupations (Sutherland, 1940). Often the illegal activities of corporations or elites are geared toward their own financial benefit because they have legal resources to find loopholes (Hagan & Parker, 1985). The FBI simplifies the definition of white collar crime as "lying, stealing, and cheating" (Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2011). Because most white collar criminals work in bureaucratic organizations (which will be described more in the next module), they are able to "pass the buck," since the hierarchy of roles and responsibilities make it difficult to pinpoint exactly who is responsible for a problem. White collar criminals are able to use their organizations and positions of status to obtain personal benefit and circumvent the law. They engage in illegal activities that may seem justified under a set of goals or operations of a company, and their actions may include false advertising, price fixing, stock rigging, bribing government officials, document destruction or alteration, or pyramid schemes (Sutherland, 1940). It is hard to prove cases against white collar criminals or to prosecute them, and even harder to get them to serve jail time (Reiman, 2009). When white collar criminals do get penalized, most cases are plea bargained; most do not serve jail sentences, and when they do, it is for short periods of time in the better penal institutions.

Most people in the general public are worried about street crime, but in reality, white collar crime is more of a threat. The National White Collar Crime Center estimates that it costs about $600 billion a year, compared with only $15 billion for street crime. Most people are not afraid of men who look like Bernie Madoff pickpocketing their wallet. Yet he talked thousands of people into investing in his company with promises of huge paybacks; most of the people lost their money while Madoff made off with an estimated $65 billion dollars. But sensationalized portrayals of criminals in the news often make the average person more fearful of stereotyped street criminals. Their chances of being a victim of a street crime are small compared to being a victim of frauds by companies and publicly traded corporations. Less than 12% of the population will be a victim of violent crime; 88% will be a victim of some sort of property crime (Chapman, 2004). One in three American households are victims of white collar crime, yet just 41% actually report it. Of those reported, a mere 21% made it into the hands of a law enforcement or consumer protection agency. This means that less than 8% of white collar crimes reach the proper authorities, according to the National Public Survey on White Collar Crime (Johnson, 2002). See table 3.2 for categories of white collar crime.

Figure 3.4 Increasing Cyber Crime

U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Crime Victimization Survey. Internet Crime http://www.project.org/info.php?recordID=166

Table 3.2 Categories of White Collar Crime

Bank Fraud	Blackmail	Bribery
Computer Fraud	Cell Phone Fraud	Counterfeiting
Credit Card Fraud	Currency Schemes	Embezzlement
Extortion	Forgery	Health Care Fraud
Housing Fraud	Insider Trading	Insurance Fraud
Internet Fraud	Investment Schemes	Kickbacks
Larceny/Theft	Money Laundering	Mortgage Fraud
Ponzi Schemes	Price Fixing	Pyramid Schemes
Racketeering	Tax Evasion	Telemarketing Fraud
Securities Fraud	Unsafe Products	Wire/Mail Fraud

Organized Crime

Organized crime is a business operation that supplies illegal goods and services. It is often identified with the Mafia, but it is far more than that. The term Mafia originally was associated with a Sicilian organization known as the Cosa Nostra. Today the term Mafia is used by a variety of different ethnic groups and organizations, usually referring to the illegal or illicit ways people try to make it in a new society. Organized crime is a form of business crime in which the goods and services provided circumvent normal legal channels. Common forms include gambling, prostitution, pornography, drug trafficking, loan sharking, extortion, money laundering, vehicle theft, and control of certain types of industries. Those involved in this type of crime seek to increase their profits and will do so by use of political corruption, intimidation, and violence, if necessary.

Victimless Crime

Victimless crime is an entire group of "crimes" that do not necessarily have a victim, other than the person who has chosen to engage in a particular behavior. They are sometimes thought to be offensive, but not necessarily harmful (except perhaps to the person himself). Common examples of victimless crimes include loitering, public indecency, possession and use of illicit drugs, pornography, and gambling.

Who Are Criminals?

Martha Stewart, convicted of insider trading.

Take a moment to imagine a criminal. In many people's minds they see a young minority man who is poor. However, this is not necessarily the profile of a criminal. It is important to remember that people of any race, any gender, any religion, and any social class can engage in criminal activities. What kind of criminal behavior they engage in differs because of their differential opportunities. For instance, White males are more likely to be CEOs than are Latina women, which may have something to do with why one finds few Latinas arrested as white collar criminals. White businessmen may not be breaking into your car and stealing your sound system because they have other, more lucrative options.

The number of people in prison, in jail, on parole, and on probation in the United States increased threefold between 1980 and 2000, to more than six million, and the number of people in prison increased from 319,598 to almost two million in the same period. Most of those in prison are poor and minority, especially Black. In recent years, Blacks have constituted 13% of the U.S. population but represented half of all prison inmates. In 2000, one out of three young Black men was either locked up, on probation, or on parole (Mauer & Huling, 1995; Glaze & Bonczar, 2008).

Data on race and crime indicates a higher proportion of nonwhite males being arrested, but some question if this is because they actually commit more crime or because they get accused more often of committing crime. Conflict theorists maintain that elite White criminals steal more money from the public yet receive milder sentences than impoverished minority males, giving rise to the allegation that the rich get richer and the poor get prison when they break the law, according to Reiman and Leighton (2009). Elites have more options in terms of the quality of legal counsel they may hire and the ability to hide behind corporate bureaucracy, and they may have more influence on swaying juries and the like when they break the law, according to Reiman and Leighton (2009).

There is an acute relationship between politics, wealth, and crime (Chambliss, 2000). For instance, if celebrities have a substance abuse problem, act violent, and break the law, they may actually benefit from the publicity they receive, while lower-class minority persons may find themselves in jail and their reputations ruined. Black males get arrested more frequently for crimes, partially because of racial profiling, partially because of the visibility of street crime, and partially because of the types of opportunities they have (Freeman, 1996). Data indicates that people who are upper class and White are arrested less frequently, and when they are prosecuted they receive fewer penalties than lower-class minority people, even when they engage in problematic or deviant behaviors (Reiman, 2009). Upper-class White women seldom get convicted for wrongdoing; Martha Stewart was a rarity, and she did not serve a long sentence in a "hard-time" penal institution.

Crime in the United States is not evenly distributed. The South experiences the highest amount of crime, while the Northeast part of the country has the lowest crime rates. This is true for both crimes against the person as well as crimes against property. Ironically, Washington, D.C., has the highest crime rate of anywhere in the nation.

Dealing with Perpetrators

The social system is designed to keep people following socially acceptable norms. Human service and criminal justice systems have been created to keep people from breaking legal norms. Remember, norms exist because they help society function smoothly and help us know what we can expect from one another. A variety of personnel, including police officers, courts, and social workers, have been employed in complex systems to keep other people in line. The most common processes used include:

Deterrence. Deterrence is punishment designed to discourage further crime. Punishment is intended to deter an individual from further criminal actions, and send a message to the general public that they will be punished if they break the law. To deter someone from doing something defined as "bad," there must be negative consequences looming that could be enforced. People may not break the law or engage in deviant behaviors because the consequences they may have to pay are uncomfortably high.

Protection. Criminals are punished in order to protect the public from an offender who could harm them. In order to make sure that people will not break the law or commit socially unacceptable acts, leaders decide to protect the rest of society from the possibility of their engaging in future criminal behavior. Major forms of protection include counseling; performing fingerprint and background checks of people working with vulnerable populations such as children, the sick, or the elderly; putting a monitor on criminals to keep them from leaving their houses; listing sexual offenders on a registry so people in the community will know about their offenses; or execution. Data on the death penalty in the United States indicates that it costs much more to kill a person than it does to give them life imprisonment, and it has not been found to actually deter crime (Amnesty International, 2009, 2010). It remains a controversial process as a result. Incarceration is the most common form of social protection once someone has broken a serious law; the number of people imprisoned has skyrocketed since the 1990s in the United States, which has the highest incarceration level of any nation in the world. New prisons have been constructed at a rate of one 1,000-bed facility per week (Macionis, 2009).

Retribution. Retribution—"If you do the crime, you have to do the time"—is the motto of this form of dealing with problematic behavior. Retribution is imposed on an offender to make them suffer in a way that is comparable to the suffering they caused. It is a form of punishment in which the perpetrator is seen to owe a debt to society that they must somehow repay or make right. This may include jail time, fines, or community service.

Rehabilitation. When people hurt others or society, it benefits everyone to make sure they will not do it again. The goal of rehabilitation is to prevent an offender from committing future offenses. This requires rehabilitation of some form, which could include therapy, education, skills training, or acquiring experiences that will make them change and be more socially respectable and responsible citizens.

Recidivism. Recidivism refers to later offenses committed by people previously convicted of crimes. Data indicates that about two-thirds of state prison inmates were rearrested for serious crimes within three years of release (Langan and Levin, 2002; http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/reentry/recidivism.cfm). The concern that people may reoffend is considered in decisions for parole. Convicted murderers such as Charles Manson and Sirhan Sirhan have asked to be released because of good behavior, but have been denied parole out of fear that they could hurt someone else again.

Community-based corrections. Some correctional programs take place in the community rather than behind prison walls. Community-based correctional programs are advised for nonserious offenders. They cost less than incarceration, avoid the stigma of imprisonment, and allow them to assume normal roles and responsibilities in the community that will hopefully lead to less recidivism. People who are on probation or parole are expected to use community-based supports in order to avoid further criminal behaviors.

Brief Overview of Theories

Functionalists, such as Durkheim, find that crime affirms the important values and norms of a community. Merton proposed a strain theory (which is explained later in this module under the theories of deviant behavior) to promote the idea that people may engage in criminal behavior in order to achieve goals by nontraditional means. Conflict theorists allege that powerless people get identified as criminals while elites skew the legal system to their advantage and avoid prosecution for illegal activities. Labeling theorists such as Becker assert that crime results not so much from what people do as from how others respond to what they do.

Racial and Ethnic Inequality

While the Statue of Liberty welcomes the entry of all kinds of people into the United States, racial and ethnic discrimination and inequality have also been a part of American history. Slavery and segregation occurred throughout much of the nation for decades, and anti-immigrant and anti-Muslim sentiments are alive today and may be perceived as social problems.

What is Race?

Race is a socially constructed category of people who share biologically transmitted traits that a society defines as important. In the 1800s there were thought to be three races—Caucasian, Negroid, and Mongoloid. Since that time, people have struggled to figure out how many races of people there are. There are more than seven million people in the United States that are multiracial. Scientists have found that people in various racial categories differ in only about 6% of their genes, which is less than the genetic variation found within each racial category. People may still seek to explain intellectual, social, athletic, or criminal behavior on the basis of biology. Today most scholars agree that social class has a much bigger influence on behavior than either race or ethnicity. The concept of race is more of a social myth than a biological reality (Montagu, 2000; Morning, 2007; Myrdal, 1944).

Ethnicity

Native American culture.

While race includes biological traits, ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage, which typically involves common ancestors, a shared language, and religion. Race and ethnicity may overlap in some ways, but they refer to different concepts. Thus, people may look similar but see themselves to be quite different. European ethnic groups may include the English, Irish, Italian, Norwegian, French, or German, to name but a few. There is significant diversity within the Latino community, with about two-thirds being of Mexican descent while others are from Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Spain, and other Latin or South American nations. Each has its own unique customs and practices, just as within the umbrella of Asian Americans, there is significant diversity among those from India, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, the Philippines, Malaysia, Japan, or Korea, to name a few. Individuals from China can be very different from one another, since there are over 56 ethnic groups in China speaking over 200 different languages. There are about two million Middle Eastern Americans, coming from over 30 countries that represent very diverse religious, historical, geographic, cultural, and racial backgrounds. People of African descent may have different ethnicities including Nigerian, Ethiopian, Cape Verdean, or Ghanaian. Jews are an ethnic group, but those who are Germanic or Ashkenazim see themselves differently from the Sephardim, who have a Spanish background. Many of the differences that people refer to as race are actually their ethnicity (Doyle, 1998).

     

     

3.5

 Minorities

The term minority refers to any category of people identified by physical or cultural traits that a society subjects to disadvantages. Minorities share a distinctive identity, such as race, ethnicity, gender, or a physical trait. They experience disadvantage and have less power than dominant group members. Sometimes minorities are a numerical minority; for instance, Blacks constitute about 13% of the U.S. population. But a group does not have to be a statistical minority to be considered a minority; women in the United States are a statistical majority, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, but they are considered a minority because they suffer discrimination as a group.

Prejudice and Discrimination

Minorities are likely to experience both prejudice and discrimination. Prejudice is a prejudgment, an attitude, and an emotional belief about a particular group of people. Discrimination is an action that denies equal treatment to a group because of some characteristic they may have (Allport, 1954; Myrdal, 1944). Often prejudicial attitudes and discriminatory behavior occur when people respond to some visible characteristic that they have no control over, such as age, gender, or race. Other times people may be prejudicial and discriminatory over less apparent characteristics, such as illness, or a behavior like sexual activity or drug use. Prejudicial and discriminatory behaviors are sometimes associated with having an authoritarian personality (Adorno et. al, 1950).

Stereotypes contribute to prejudice. They are oversimplified, subjective constructs associated with individuals or groups. Stereotypes tend to categorize groups of people instead of looking at them as individuals. They can occur on the basis of race, gender, ethnicity, hair color (e.g., blonde jokes), disability, physical or mental conditions, or cognitive ability, to name a few.

Prejudice and discrimination can occur on an individual level between people, or they can pervade the entire social system and its organizations. Institutionalized discrimination occurs when a particular group is systematically denied access to the same goods, services, treatments, and opportunities as those in the dominant group. Institutionalized discrimination may contribute to ideologies that foster individual prejudice and discrimination, which transform into institutionalized views and practices.

As shown in Table 3.3, ideally people are not prejudiced against others and treat them respectfully and fairly. Sometimes people are not prejudiced but they end up acting in discriminatory ways toward others, perhaps out of naiveté or because of peer pressure (such as bullying a student they didn't have anything against, simply because everyone else was doing it). There are times when people may have prejudicial feelings but do not act in discriminatory ways, usually because there are laws or social consequences for doing so. For instance, a storekeeper may not like a particular type of person but they sell goods to them anyway because the repercussions would be difficult if they didn't. Examples of the prejudiced discriminatory would include Nazis, Ku Klux Klan members, or those who engage in hate crime.

Table 3.3 Discrimination

Prejudice	Yes	No
Yes	Prejudiced discriminator	Prejudiced non-discriminator
No	Non-prejudiced discriminator	Ideal: no prejudice and no discrimination

Racism

Immigration issues are center stage today.

Racism is the assertion that people of one race are less worthy than others. Racists may believe that someone is even biologically, intellectually, or morally inferior. There may be individual racism, where racist attitudes and actions are directed toward a person or small group of people. Sometimes organizations or institutions may act in ways that treat people of other races as though they were inferior and limit their opportunities for equal treatment and success. Not all citizens receive the same opportunities as others, often due to institutionalized discrimination. For instance, Asians have been the most easily assimilated group into mainstream American society, with one of the highest education and income levels of any minority group. At the other end of the continuum, Native Americans continue to suffer the impact of institutional discrimination, with over a quarter living below the poverty line—compared with 12% of the general population—as well as extremely high unemployment rates. Current legislation in Arizona would demand that all Latino-looking people prove they are citizens in order to receive services, which has created lively debate on the current role of minorities and immigrants in the United States. Racial profiling, in which police or others in power consider race or ethnicity to be a sign of probable guilt, is another example of institutional racism.

Conflict of varying proportions may occur when a group is denied access to the same services, rights, and privileges as other groups. While many groups do not seek formal action when the violations are of a minor or personal nature, they may do so when they band together to demand fair and equal treatment. This occurs primarily when the violations are significant and institutionally pervasive. Legal action is sometimes required to force people to accept others. New laws have allowed children of different races to go to the same school, where once they went to racially segregated schools. Programs like Affirmative Action attempt to address institutional discrimination by ensuring that government and educational institutions include minorities, who were once denied access. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) seeks to protect people from discrimination on the basis of age, race, color, gender, disability, national origin, religion, and pregnancy. Anti-hate-group legislation has resulted to punish those who victimize others on the basis of who they are. These can be found at the webpage listed at the end of this chapter.

Religious Discrimination

Religion is a set of beliefs and practices concerned with the meaning of life and the universe and how people are supposed to behave. As a result, it is associated with emotional intensity regarding values about what is right. Most children adopt the religious orientations of their parents and cultures. Often religious affiliation is associated with ethnicity or nationalism. When people believe different things, this can generate social problems, especially when religious group membership creates in-groups and out-groups who have belief systems of superiority or inferiority. It does not matter if people are Jews, Muslims, Catholics, or Buddhists; each group has a set of rituals and beliefs that they believe to be sacred. When others act in ways that disrespect their belief system, this can cause problems. Some social problems generated from differences in religious ideology include the Crusades, the Holocaust, the Salem witch trials, Native American genocide, contemporary Islamaphobia, terrorist jihad, or loss of independence for the people of Tibet (see http://www.savetibet.org/). While religion may be functional for societies by giving members a conceptual framework through which to understand life, it may also be a source of conflict as one group seeks to impose its ideologies on others. Religious discrimination has occurred in Northern Ireland between the Protestants and the Catholics and in the Middle East between the Muslims, Jews, and Christians, to name a few examples.

Scapegoating Theory

Scapegoats are singled out for unwarranted treatment in which they are blamed for something that they may never have done. Usually this occurs when a dominant group wants to take out their frustrations on some convenient, visible target or displace fault. This is also known as the "kick the dog" phenomenon, where someone who has had a bad day at work comes home and gets mad at the dog, when in reality he is upset about an interaction at work. It is dangerous to confront one's boss; it is much easier to get upset with a victim who can't hurt you. Adorno (1950) studied personality types and found that people with authoritarian personalities, or those with rigid conventional beliefs (who were convinced they knew what was good, bad, right, and wrong and they had the moral authority to enforce their views on others) were more likely to discriminate against others.

As this theory pertains to the 9/11 example, a student of mine who had dark hair, brown eyes, and olive skin found herself surrounded by dozens of angry people shortly after 9/11 when she was at the Boston airport, because "people like you were responsible for killing thousands of innocents at the World Trade Center." My jeanclad student was not Muslim but Italian-Catholic. People simply misunderstood her ethnicity and responded to her coloring. They were upset and suspicious of anyone who fit their stereotype of someone from the Middle East.

Diversification of the United States

The United States has given people who came here from all over the world new opportunities to build better lives for themselves and their families. Immigration is an essential part of the nation's development. Immigration continues to be a major contributor to the composition of the society. White Europeans used to constitute the largest portion of Americans, with African Americans being the largest minority group, but Latino Americans will be the largest minority group in just a few years (Kotkin, 2008). Estimates indicate that since nearly half the children born in the United States today are minorities, minorities are expected to become the U.S. majority within the next forty years (Yen, 2010). See figure 3.5. This will result in a new face of who America is.

Social Dynamics of Living in Diverse Societies

Societies that are homogeneous, or similar, have common cultures and histories, which may make understanding one another a bit easier than people in diverse, heterogeneous societies where there are more dissimilarities. As shown in Figure 3.6, the nation varies considerably by ethnic background. Therefore people in Iowa may view others differently than people who live in Louisiana or Arizona. When people seem different from one another by culture, language, history, or experience, they undergo a process to figure out how to interact with others. Dominant groups set the standards that minority groups must accommodate. These processes include the following:

Ethnocentrism is the process by which people judge others based on standards that are relative to those in their own backgrounds. The term, coined by William Sumner, explains how one group may feel its views and lifestyle are the best and attempt to justify why other people's behavior, religion, lifestyle, or experiences aren't as good. Just because a group is different does not mean that they are bad; Anderson (2000) discusses how there are codes of conduct that exist in minority communities in which people attempt to support important social values.

Figure 3.5 Distribution of U.S. Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2010 and 2050

Distribution of U.S. Population by Race/Ethnicity, 2010 and 2050, Kaiser Slides, The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, March 18 2013. Reprinted by permission.

Minorities are expected to become the U.S. majority within the next 40 years.

Figure 3.6 Ancestry in the United States

Assimilation is a process by which minorities come to incorporate the norms, values, and behaviors supported by the dominant culture. People may learn to speak a new language, wear different styles of clothing, and live different lifestyles as a result. The dominant society doesn't change and expects the newcomer or outsider to adjust their behavior to conform with dominant norms.

Pluralism is a social state in which racial and ethnic minorities keep much of their own identity as a group but are still a part of the main society and support the dominant agendas of the new society. This inclusion approach promotes diversification of society, which may require adjustment among all parties. Sometimes pluralism is referred to as the "salad bowl" theory of diversity, in contrast to the "melting pot" theory, where everyone is encouraged to be the same. A salad with tomatoes, croutons, peppers, and a variety of other vegetables may be more interesting and delicious than a salad that consists just of iceberg lettuce.

Modern-day freed Cambodian slaves.

Anomie, or normlessness, is a common experience among first-generation immigrants in a new country, according to Durkheim (1964). Adjusting to living in a new place where people feel they should give up many of their old customs and norms for new ones can be stress-producing. People who feel they don't fit in may feel alienated, isolated, frustrated, or even suicidal.

Segregation is a form of institutionalized discrimination in which people of a particular kind are provided rights and privileges while members of another group may be denied access to them. Segregation may include racial segregation, male-only clubs, apartment complexes with no-child policies, or religions that refuse to marry people of different faiths.

Slavery occurs when one group of people is economically or physically controlled by another group. Africans who were exported to the colonies were owned by U.S. slave owners, and the fruits of their labors were essential in the building of the nation. According to Anti-Slavery International, there are over 29 million slaves today, more than at any time in history, who cost on average $340, or as low as $40, each. Most contemporary slavery consists of debt-bondage, sex trafficking of women and children, forced labor, and economic servitude (British Broadcasting Corporation, 2010). See figure 3.7.

Genocide is the systematic mass killing of one group of people by another, often to fulfill a political agenda. This occurred during the Holocaust in World War II, but has also occurred in Darfur, Rwanda, and Srebrenica.

Figure 3.7 2008–2009 Client Demographics for Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking (CAST)

From Human Trafficking National Conference of State Legislatures San Diego, CA, conference report. Copyright © 2009 Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking. Reprinted by permission.

Theoretical Overview of Racism as a Social Problem

Throughout the world, issues of race and ethnicity continue to pose social problems. Data clearly indicates that all people have the same basic genetic framework and human potential, but prejudice and discrimination continue to put some people in privileged positions and some in positions of disadvantage. As the demographic characteristics of the world's population change, who is considered dominant or minority will change as well. It may be functional to create an attitude of openness toward diversity, given the changing demographics. Conflict theorists indicate that discrimination on both an individual and institutional level continues to occur worldwide, as evidenced in the continued high rates of war, conflict, ethnic cleansings, workplace inequalities, and interpersonal tensions. Are people of different religions, ethnic groups, nationalities, or races really that different? Symbolic interactionists would hold that there are more similarities than differences between humans, and it is the social construction of reality that determines whether we label others as good or bad.

Sex and Gender Inequity

Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behavior, activities, and attributes that a particular society considers appropriate for men and women. Stratification by gender is a social problem because women have been denied equal access to wealth, power, and privilege worldwide. Genderized roles create social role requisites that prescribe certain behaviors for males and females. The distinct roles and behavior may give rise to gender inequalities, i.e., differences between men and women that systematically favor one group. In turn, such inequalities can lead to inequities between men and women in both social status and health. While women may be a statistical majority, they are considered a minority group because of socially structured inequality in patriarchal societies. Patriarchy is the dominant social pattern in which males dominate females in the home, in the business world, and in the social world. Patriarchy exists largely because of ideology, or a subjective view that men are better at being leaders than women (Witz, 1996). Research indicates that there is little biological, cognitive, or emotional reason for the unequal treatment of women (Ehrenreich, 1999). The disparity in the treatment of women is a product of social construction.

Sexism

Sexism is a belief that one sex is superior to the other or more valuable than the other. People used to assume that men and women acted differently because of inherent genetic characteristics—"biology is destiny" (Friedan, 1963). Today we know that it is socialization and social structure that create attitudes and behaviors, not genetics. Whether one is born a male or female has significant implications for self-identity, life chances, and social opportunity. When members of a gender are devalued, they experience prejudice and discrimination that limits their economic and social opportunities. Men worldwide have had significantly more opportunities to access wealth, prestige, and power than women have. While male dominance is changing in many parts of the world, gender inequity remains a significant social problem worldwide.

Sex or Gender?

People may use these terms interchangeably, but sex refers to the biological categorization of an individual according to whether they have an XX or an XY chromosome. The term gender refers to a cultural ideal about how males or females are supposed to act. Gender and its expectations for appropriate male or female behavior is a product of socialization, which is always influenced by culture and time. Traditionally, culture has indicated that the proper role for men is to be dominant, aggressive, brave, problem-solvers, leaders, and caretakers of the family. Women's gender role prescriptions have tended to view them as domestically based, nurturing, emotional, passive, and caregivers. As a result of this kind of thinking, some occupations have become gender-linked, such as "pink-collar jobs" like food service or housekeeping, and "blue-collar jobs" like construction or transportation. It also keeps people locked into certain types of role expectations, such as women will take care of the home and children while men are better leaders and primary breadwinners (Hothschild, 2003; Kimmell, 2003). Gendered-behavioral expectations may be counterproductive in a postindustrial society.

Sexual Behavior

Views of sex and gender also influence people's sexual behaviors. Heterosexuality (or male-female relationships) has been the normative form of mate selection. Homosexuality was seen as a form of deviant behavior because it violated the norms of heterosexuality (Humphreys, 1970). In recent years, people have become more open about same-sexed relationships, and norms have been challenged to reflect diverse sexual behaviors, including gay, lesbian, bisexual, transsexual, and sexual preference questioning (GLBTQ). While some societies have reflected traditional gender and sexual preference roles, we are currently living in a period in which these norms are in flux. While a traditional view of gender may assume that women would be sexually available at all times, a more contemporary view would hold that women have the right to determine if, with whom, when, where, and how they wish to express their sexuality. This view also now applies to men and to people of all ages. The issue of sexual preference has been addressed in courts, especially in allegations of rape, to protect people's right to control their own bodies. Sexual expression may be perceived as a form of social problem, especially in the areas of gay rights, prostitution, pornography, sexual abuse, and rape. Social norms about sexual attitudes, partners, and activities exist throughout the world, and their violations are a common source of public discomfort.

Gender Socialization

When parents learn they are expecting a child, some may have a preference for a boy or girl. Depending on their cultural orientation, children may be socialized into traditional gender roles or more contemporary roles that encourage more nontraditional ones. Studies indicate that even when parents choose to raise their children in androgynous ways to avoid sex stereotyping, traditional gender socialization still occurs. Parents subtly and unconsciously may socialize their children in ways that instill within them values and behaviors about their role as males or females. Peers, the media, and a host of other social influences may encourage them to follow gender paths. Traditional gender roles may limit both boys and girls; they make free choice of behavior challenging. For instance, boys who wish to pursue more nurturing fields and actions may be chastised for not being masculine enough; girls who don't adhere to the traditional feminine model may experience greater discrimination and ridicule than those who follow the beauty and nurturing role requisites.

One of my favorite videos that explores the implications of gender socialization, especially for males, is the Media Education Foundation film Tough Guise. Narrated by Jackson Katz, it provides contemporary examples of how boys are socialized into traditional masculine roles. Find it on YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/).

Problems Related to Gender Inequality

Title IX has played a major role in women's sports.

Gender inequality impacts both males and females and may limit their ability to achieve their unique goals. That said, women continue to experience more social and personal problems merely because they are women. Let's look at major areas of inequality and concern, as defined by Macionis (2010):

Marriage: While marriage is one of the oldest social contracts, it has come under more scrutiny in recent years. Jesse Bernard (1982) found that the happiest men were those who were married—and the most unhappy and depressed were married women. Traditional marriages liberate men but constrain women to household and childrearing tasks that require much attention and effort. Women continue to do the bulk of childcare and housework (Fox & Hesse-Beiber, 1984); even women who work full-time jobs come home to find they have to work a "second shift" (Hochschild, 2003). This has led some women to conclude that "a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle" (Dunn, 1970). The result is that increasing numbers of women wonder if they should marry, and if they find themselves in bad marriages, whether they should divorce.

Education: Girls have systematically had less access to education around the world, especially higher education that would lead them toward better jobs. Even when they are in school, children receive messages that direct them into stereotyped gender roles. Gender stereotyping from textbooks and films portrays an image about how females and males are supposed to be. Teachers, parents, and peers convey genderized role expectations. Even when adults try not to send messages that push children into traditional roles, data indicates that subtle, unintended messages of gender still shape children's minds. Boys continue to have interests nurtured in math, computers, engineering, science, and technical programs, while girls continue to be socialized, albeit subtly, into the helping professions, English, the arts, and fields like sociology. Educational institutions, like all social institutions, are subject to pressures to conform to norms, which include those of traditional gender behavior and relationships.

Sports: While Congress passed Title IX, the Educational Amendment to the Civil Rights Act that banned sex discrimination in publicly funded educational programs, female-oriented athletic programs are scarce in comparison to male-oriented programs. This is largely a product of funding; male sports continue to receive more money to support programs, equipment, and coaching staff. Females are not as prevalent in professional sports, and when they are, the types of sports are more individualized like tennis, gymnastics, swimming, or track, rather than competitive team sports like baseball, football, and basketball—which are the big money sports.

Media: Media is a pervasive social influence that inevitably impacts how people see themselves and others. Television, film, the Internet, video games, magazines, and advertising all send forth clear gender-biased messages.

Politics: In local, state, and federal elections, the candidates most likely to run—and win—are male. While year-to-year statistics vary, women usually consist of far less than a quarter of all governmental officials. Females are more likely to be found as office staff, clerks, and secretaries.

Work: More women work than ever before, including those with children. Yet women continue to make less than men; women earn 77 cents for every dollar a man earns (Gunelius, 2008). Jobs continue to be sex-stereotyped, with men more likely to be hired in positions that require physical danger (such as police or firefighters), strength and endurance (such as construction work and truck driving), and leadership roles (such as clergy, judges, government officials, and business executives). Women are still more likely to be hired into feminine roles, such as child care, teachers, secretaries, dental hygienists, nutritionists, or nurses. There exists a glass ceiling in many organizations in which subtle discrimination effectively inhibits the movement of women into the highest positions of organizations (Longley, 2010; Martin, 1991). While there has been some improvement for women in the workforce, Lang (2010) asks the question—"Have women shattered the glass ceiling yet?"—and concludes that the answer is a resounding "No."

Religion: The majority of priests, rabbis, imams, and ministers are male. In some faiths, women are excluded from clergy positions. Most people perceive God to have a gender, and it is usually male.

Harassment and Sexual Violence: Women are more likely to be sexually harassed, raped, and subjected to sexual violence. Domestic violence is typically, though not exclusively, perpetrated by men against women. It is often not reported because traditional gender roles have supported role prescriptions of submissiveness for women and aggression for men.

The degree of discrimination based on gender is long and pervasive, which has given rise to the feminist movement. However, it is important to realize that not everyone accepts the legitimacy of these complaints from women, whom news commentator Rush Limbaugh (2005) calls "feminazis," and who sees the women's movement as designed to "allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream."

Individual Sexism versus Institutional Sexism

Gender socialization and cultural role prescriptions may encourage prejudice and discrimination; men may stereotype women and women may stereotype men, and each may have expectations for how the other is "supposed" to act. On an individual level, these prescriptions may support or inhibit the creation of real relationships. Traditionally, since men have had access to greater social opportunities to achieve wealth, prestige, and power, they have been in a dominant position. Women still provide the majority of child care, cook and clean, shop and take care of the household, and suffer more domestic violence. Because many women are so busy caring for both the household and are also employed outside the house, they may feel oppressed and frustrated since they have to work a "double day" (Hochschild, 2003).

Some societies, especially in India or China (which has a one-child-per-family policy), have a strong preference for male children. Medical technology enables parents to know before their child is born whether it will be male or female, and it is common in some parts of the world that have a strong preference for males to terminate pregnancies of female fetuses (http://www.infanticide.org/). This is resulting in a demographic gender imbalance; instead of a normal 51-to-49 female/male ratio, in some societies there are now significantly more male children being born than female, which may have long-term cultural ramifications.

Do Women Have Equal Rights?

Most societies are patriarchal, or male dominated. The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) for women was never ratified by the U.S. government. The Amendment states that equality of rights under the law shall not be denied by the United States or by any state on account of sex. In 1923 in Seneca Falls, for the celebration of the 75th anniversary of the 1848 Woman's Rights Convention, Alice Paul introduced the Lucretia Mott Amendment, which read "Men and women shall have equal rights throughout the United States." The ERA has not succeeded in getting the necessary state ratifications to the act, resulting in the country being unwilling to guarantee women constitutional rights equal to those of men. Success in putting the ERA into the Constitution would require passage by two-thirds in each house of Congress and ratification by thirty-eight states, which has not happened to date (http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/). While there have been some protections of women's rights put into law, it is important to realize that the ERA was never passed.

Gender Theories

Functionalists may regard traditional gender roles to be functional for society because men and women would have a clear division of labor and expectations about how the other was supposed to act. When men were seen as breadwinners who worked outside the home and women were regarded as domestic and family caregivers, there were clearer role assignments. However, current economic conditions have made it virtually impossible for most families to survive on one income. The traditional roles may also not be emotionally satisfying for either men or women. Conflict theorists regard traditional roles to be exploitative for both men and women as they are forced into expected roles and may experience resentment when they fail to conform. Many women are single parents and cannot care for their families and earn reasonable incomes in a system of institutionalized sexism. The term "feminization of poverty" is used to explain that most poverty occurs for women, not men, because of economic inequities, and that most women are expected to take care of children, the sick, and the elderly family members (Sidel, 2006; Davis, 1981; Ehrenreich, 2001; Fass & Cauthen, 2006).

Symbolic interactionists focus on the subtle messages that children learn about how men and women are supposed to act, as well as how power and control are conveyed in relationships. Books that do not show women in leadership positions, family patterns in which women are doing the majority of cooking and cleaning, or sex-segregated teams all send clear messages about how genders are expected to behave. These theorists feel that minute, everyday interactions accumulate to create a social order that make men and women very different types of people. Feminist theorists are a variation of conflict theorists, and believe that women have the same political, social, economic, educational, institutional, and sexual rights as men. Reaction to feminism ranges from those who see it as an extension of democratic equality to those who see it as a radical behavior that could undermine society. Theory helps explain why some people continue to think that "a woman's place is in the home," while others think that women should throw off the cloak of exploitation and be more assertive about demanding equal opportunities and treatment.

Social Stratification and Economic Inequity

People in all social systems are stratified, or layered, from low to high, with some individuals or groups being perceived as more worthy than others. Stratification is a hierarchy of positions with regard to economic production, which influences the social rewards to those in the positions. It also influences the way people think about things, how they view others, and what they perceive to be fair. Social stratification is a universal phenomenon, but the forms it takes may vary from place to place. A person's social position is influenced by the position their parents held, and it will influence the position that their children will have. In this respect, there is an intergenerational dynamic to social stratification.

Social stratification is not simply a reflection of individual differences, but a trait of society (Macionis, 2010). Decisions of worth are socially constructed and have little to do with individuals' internal traits. People may be ranked according to ascribed characteristics such as race, gender, and physical characteristics such as height, weight, or disability, and they are ranked on achieved characteristics such as income, wealth, job, and prestige. If people are ranked high, they have more social rewards than people who are ranked low. Table 3.4 shows how certain characteristics of individuals put them in a position of greater likelihood for social success than others who fall at the bottom of the social strata. Therefore, a White male is more likely to reap more social rewards, such as income and job prestige, than a nonwhite female.

Table 3.4 Social Rankings in the United States

	Ethnicity/Race	Gender	Nationality	Religion	Height	Income	Wealth
High	White	Male	United States	Christian	Tall	Rich	Extensive
				Jewish
Low	Nonwhite	Female	Immigrant	Non-Judeo-Christian	Short	Poor	Limited

Caste and Class

Judging people according to their social placement is not a new phenomenon. Societies such as India created social structures in which people were born into castes, or social placements based on the parents' social position. People born into the priestly class were called Brahmins, the warriors were Kshatriya, the merchants were Vastriya, and the artisans were Shudras. Whatever caste one's parents were in determined what their child's caste would be. Once born into a particular caste, it was impossible to change one's social standing in this type of stratification system.

President Bill Clinton is an example of vertical mobility.

Social class systems are different from caste systems because one can change one's social position—vertically, horizontally, or intergenerationally. Most people hope for upward vertical mobility, where they will improve their social standing through hard work, education, or luck. This form of mobility is known as the American Dream. An example of vertical mobility is Bill Clinton. He grew up in less than ideal circumstances; his father, a traveling salesman, died in an automobile accident three months before he was born. He was raised in his early years by grandparents while his mother went away to college to study nursing so she could take better care of her son. Later she remarried, and Bill's stepfather was allegedly abusive and alcoholic. Bill attended public high school, participated in school activities, and ultimately found his niche in public service, which later culminated in his becoming the 42nd President of the United States (Clinton, 2005). This is unlike many presidents who were born into wealthy, powerful, aristocratic homes that set them up for success.

As it applies to the concept of vertical mobility, remember that whatever goes up can also come down. The economic depression of 2010 resulted in many middle-class people losing their jobs, their homes, and the lifestyles they were accustomed to. Downward vertical mobility occurs when one loses one's social position and falls into a lower social strata. Horizontal mobility is most common, when people may change jobs or move to different locations, but their social standing is pretty much the same from one place to another. Intergenerational mobility occurs when children get better homes, educations, and jobs than their parents. Many parents sacrifice and invest in their children's future in hopes they will have more comfortable lifestyles and struggle less than they did. Upward intergenerational mobility was common for much of the history of the United States, as each generation achieved higher social status than the generation before; for instance, my grandfather was a local farmer, my father was a successful businessman, and I am a college professor. Economic trends indicate that intergenerational mobility for large segments of the population may be a thing of the past; a shrinking of the middle class is occurring, which makes it less likely that children will do better than their parents (Krugman, 2002).

Determinants of Social Class

Social class is often associated with how much money one makes, but it is actually much more than that, which is why sociologists prefer the term socioeconomic status (SES). SES is determined by one's wealth, prestige, and power. Wealth includes income, but also other financial assets, such as property, stocks and bonds, savings, jewelry, art, boats, and other items of significant financial worth.

Social class prestige and income are influenced by the type of occupation one has, as well as education—whether one has gone to college, the type of degrees one has, the major areas of specialty, and where one went to school (e.g., elite private universities compared with local public community colleges). Career aspirations are influenced by class, as is the ability to go to school. Some occupations have more prestige than others. Thirty years ago the most prestigious jobs included being a doctor, lawyer, judge, banker, professional athlete, or entertainer. Today the most prestigious jobs still include being a doctor, but also include being a firefighter, teacher, nurse, or military leader. Less prestigious jobs include real estate brokers, bankers, actors, and accountants (Brandon, 2007). In a Wall Street Journal article (Light, 2011), 200 jobs were rated based on income, working environment, stress, physical demands, and job outlook, using data from the Labor Dept. and U.S. Census. The best jobs included software engineers, computer systems analysts, actuaries, and mathematicians, while the worst jobs included iron workers, lumberjacks, roofers, taxi drivers, and EMTs.

Social class influences with whom one associates; people in the upper classes network with other elites who can help them pursue occupational and social interests, whereas people in the lower strata may network with others to find community resources and share strategies for survival. What one does for recreation, involvement in civic and social activities, and political involvement varies by social class. Where one lives, both in location and residence type, is influenced by social class standing. Material objects owned are class-related as well. So are the types of physical and mental illnesses people get and how long they will live. There is virtually nothing about our lives that isn't impacted by social class.

Social Class Distribution

There is great variability among the social classes in the United States. The mean, or average, income for a U.S. taxpayer in 2005 was $55,238. Some people make less than that, but a few individuals earn much more. In 2005, 91 million Americans, or two-thirds of those filing taxes, made $50,000 or less, and about one in three made less than $20,000 per year (IRS, 2011), which is below the poverty limit. The median or halfway point of income distribution in the United States is about $40,000, meaning that half of the population earns less than that amount, and half of the population earns more (Chandler, 2011).

How many people are in which social classes is a topic of great analysis and scrutiny (Levine, 2006; Thompson & Hickey, 2005; Beeghley, 2004; Gilbert, 2002). The population of the United States was once thought to be a bell curve, with few people being very poor, few being very rich, and most people hovering in what was called middle class. Today, the distribution of wealth and income in the United States is not a bell curve at all. Rather, some allege it is a skewed distribution, with most people not having many assets, or an L-shape (Schweickart, 2002), with a small number of people holding the bulk of the assets. As Schweickart pointed out, if we divided the income of the United States into thirds, the top 10% of the population would get a third and the next 30% would get another third, and the bottom 60% would get the last third. But if we divided the nation by wealth, we would see a very different picture. Analyzing the nation by the distribution of wealth, the top 1% own about 50% of the nation's wealth, and the top 5% of the income bracket is estimated to have more than the combined wealth of the bottom 95% of the population (http://www.lcurve.org). Challenging economic conditions and the shifting distribution of wealth have led sociologists to the conclusion that it will be increasingly hard for the children of middle class and poor people to live as well as their parents and grandparents.

Major social class classifications include:

The upper upper class. The "rich" are considered to be the upper 5% of the population. Within that group, the most upper class Americans, sometimes referred to as the capitalist class, consists of the richest 1% of the population. They tend to be top-level executives, politicians, celebrities, and heirs, and many have Ivy League educations. They hold incomes of more than $500,000 per year and net wealth of over a million dollars. The amount of money held by this elite group of people has increased significantly in recent years. Over 240,000 people filed tax returns with incomes over $1 million in 2004, and in 2007 there were 793 billionaires in the United States with a combined net worth of $3.5 trillion (Chandler, 2011).

Between 2006 and 2007, there was an increase of 19% in the number of billionaires and a 35% increase of their net worth, while poverty rates were at their highest point in three decades. In considering how much money they have, it is useful to remember that a billion is 1,000 times larger than a million, and a trillion is a thousand billion. The richest 828,323 taxpayers reported a combined income that equaled the combined income of the poorest 81 million Americans in 2005 (Chandler, 2010; McIntyre, 2011). The rich are considered elite aristocrats, organizational leaders in corporations, politics, foundations, health care, and communications. Because they have extensive wealth, they tend to live luxurious lifestyles and may have multiple homes, belong to private clubs where they mingle with others of their socioeconomic status, and have children who attend private schools so they can acquire the opportunity to continue the family's power and influence. This top group of individuals is stratified between those who have inherited money ("old money" families such as the Rockefellers) and those who have more recently acquired the wealth ("new money" families such as Bill Gates). The "upper upper class" of old money is significantly more prestigious than the "lower upper class" of more newly acquired wealth.

The upper middle class. Upper middle class people are estimated to constitute 15% of the population. They tend to be highly educated, often with graduate degrees, and hold positions with high social prestige, live in nice homes that they own, and have discretionary income to pursue recreational and career interests for themselves and their families. Common types of occupations may include lawyers, physicians, CEOs, stockbrokers, accountants, business people, university administrators, and mid-to-high-level organizational administrators. Upper class households have incomes varying from a low of $100,000 to the high five-figure range.

The middle class. This category of social class ranges from 30–50% of the population, depending on how it is classified. Most people regard themselves as middle class, but the income in this category ranges widely, from $30,000 to upwards of $75,000. This is why sometimes scholars refer to "middle class" and "lower middle class." The upper end of this continuum, or middle middle class, may include professionally trained people who work as teachers, small business owners, salespeople, or skilled technicians. The higher levels of middle class have been declining as more people seem to make less money. This has led to what some experts call "the shrinking middle class" (Lind, 2004).

Lower middle class individuals are considered middle class, but their lives are significantly different than members at the higher levels of the category. Lower middle class workers are often support workers for those with higher levels of occupation and income. These include secretaries, assistants, paralegals, bank tellers, salespeople, and skilled technicians. People who earn $30,000–$50,000 a year may be considered lower middle class.

The working class. Often referred to as "blue collar" or "pink collar" employees, compared to "white collar" distinctions of the upper middle class, people in this category may work in unskilled, highly routinized jobs, such as food service, janitorial, or cashiers, or they may perform manual labor, such as construction, plumbing, electrical work, installations, fishing, factory work, nursing home work, child care services, repair shops, or yard work. Usually high school educated, they may have minimal routes for career advancement and earn between $15,000 and $40,000 per year. Data indicates that men in this class tend to earn more than women. Working to serve the needs of others, they may have minimal control over their schedule or work conditions. When the economy does not need their services, their jobs are those most likely to suffer, as working class people do not tend to have much job security. About 30–45% of the American population is considered working class, depending upon the definition used.

The lower class. Also known as the underclass or the poor, the 12–20% of individuals in this classification are at the bottom of the stratification ladder. They have the least access to wealth, prestige, or power of any group. Some people in this category are elderly, ill, disabled, or unable to work. Their education and skills training levels may be low, which makes it difficult for them to be competitive when looking for jobs. Many people in this class are employed full or part time, but they work at low hourly rates and with no benefits such as health insurance, life insurance, or retirement. A household income of $18,000 may be typical, and people may double up in order to pool resources.

Implications of Stratification

Max Weber (1958) alleged that one's social placement determined the totality of one's life chances. Social class determines where people will live, how well educated they may be, their occupation, their physical health, their mental health, the forms of recreation they enjoy, their social networks, their political views, their attitudes toward childrearing, and how long they may live (Hernnstein & Murray, 1996). A child's life opportunity is largely determined by the social class of his or her parents, since their social position may make certain opportunities or challenges available (Lareau, 2003).

How we view ourselves, other people, and social situations depends on our social class. Class determines what kinds of privileges we have and what kinds of obstacles we encounter. How people view us is influenced by their social position relative to our own. Different opportunity structures and challenges are an inherent part of where we are on the stratification ladder (Davis & Moore, 1945; Allen & Dimock, 2007; Kerbo, 1996; Lenski, 1984; Levine, 2006). People on high rungs have access to wealth, prestige, and power; people at the bottom do not. People in positions of influence become the dominant group. People without wealth, prestige, and power drift downwards on the social stratification ladder and have constrained opportunities as a result. Where we are on the stratification ladder impacts our experiences, hence our sense of reality. As a result, wealthy people may not comprehend how difficult it is to be poor. People living in industrialized societies may not be able to relate to the challenges of those in underdeveloped countries (Bales, 1999).

Class determines what we see. Data indicates that one of the most threatened groups of people on the stratification ladder is the working class, because they have been socialized to have middle class aspirations and dreams, but lack the ability to easily achieve them. Hovering so close to the lower class, they do not want to lose their foothold on their social position. This may breed resentment, prejudice, and discrimination against those on the lower rungs of society, for if they advance, the positions that they may likely secure would be those of the working class (Schmidt 2008).

Stratification studies indicate that even when people have the same abilities, wealthy people and their children will have a much easier time being economically successful, while poor people will encounter so many obstacles that they may not. Children with identical IQs will not fare equally in society; the son of a lawyer would be given the education, health care, and social networking opportunities that would enable him to be successful, compared to the life chances of an equally bright son of a janitor (Bennett, 1998).

The growing gap between rich and poor is a social problem in the United States.

Wealth concentration as a social problemThe American Dream holds that people want to earn more money and live more comfortable lifestyles than they had before. The gap between rich and poor in the United States is now larger than at any time since 1928, and is now the greatest of any industrialized nation in the world (Arons, 2006). Between 1979 and 2007, the average income of people in the bottom 50% of the population only rose 6%, but the richest 1% of U.S. citizens increased their incomes by over 299%. A U.S. Congressional Office Bureau study in 2007 found that the richest 1% of Americans earned almost $17 trillion dollars—two trillion dollars more than the combined wealth of all the people in the lower 90% of the population (Aziz, 2008; Anderson, 2006).

Capitalism and the growth of corporations, especially multinational corporations that have no physical boundaries, are largely responsible for their increasing wealth. The elites may have lawyers and accountants who help them find loopholes so that they do not have to pay heavy taxes. For instance, the statutory corporate income tax rate is supposed to be 35%, but Boeing Corporation reported nearly $10 billion in profits between 2008 and 2010 and did not pay a dime of federal corporate tax, and General Electric paid taxes of 3.4% between 2005 and 2009. The Bush tax cuts resulted in $91 billion in taxes that did not have to be paid, and over three-quarters of that money went to the 0.6% of the population making a half million dollars or more. People making more than $10 million in 2005 received a quarter of the tax relief. In comparison, the poorest half of the American taxpayers, those making $30,000 or less, received an average of $5 each, or 0.4% of the total tax breaks. People making $75,000 or less received a total of 3.2% of the tax breaks (McIntyre 2011). See figure 3.8 for a breakdown of tax rates by class.

Figure 3.8 Tax Rate by Class

Catherine Rampell, How Much Americans Actually Pay In Taxes. New York Times. Economix. April 8, 2009. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/04/08/how-much-americans-actually-pay-in-taxes/

The poor pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes than the wealthy.

The amount of money people donate to charitable activities may not reflect their incomes. The less you have, the more likely you are to give, according to recent data (Greve, 2009). The poorest Americans give above their capacity, donating more in comparison to the most well-off upper-fifth of society. Not only does this group of low-income Americans give more of their income to charity, but double the percentage of income that the richest individuals in the study do. Americans at the bottom of the income-distribution pyramid are the country's biggest givers per capita, as shown in Fig. 3.9. The 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey shows that households with incomes below $20,000 gave a higher percentage of their earnings to charity than did any other income group: 4.6% on average. As income increased, the percentage given away declined: households earning between $50,000 and $100,000 donated 2.5% or less. Only at high income levels did the percentage begin to rise again: for households with incomes over $100,000, the number was 3.1% (Brooks, 2008).

Figure 3.9 Charitable Giving by Class

Data from 2000 Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey. Retrieved from www.thinkprogress.org. Reprinted by permission.

Wealth, when shared, can help create social equity. Wealth, when confined in the hands of a small group of individuals, leads to a skewed system of benefits and challenges. The elite may not have a realistic conception of how hard it is to be middle class or poor, or how much their benefits have eased the trajectories of their lives (Blau & Blau, 1982).

Poverty as a Social Problem

In child poverty, the United States is last among 24 developed countries.

Research indicates that certain segments of the population are more likely to be poor. These include children under age 18, women, and people who live in urban areas. Most poor Americans are White, but in relation to their overall numbers, Native Americans, African Americans, and Hispanics are more likely to be poor, indicating that poverty is a problem for all races, but is disproportionately high for minority group members (Macionis, 2011).

When people are poor, they experience a host of difficulties that would likely be preventable if they had money. These include higher morbidity, or physical illness; higher rates of mortality, or death; more serious forms of mental illness; housing distress or homelessness; educational difficulties and limitations; more likely to be victims of crime; greater propensity to engage in visible crime; more unemployment; fewer benefits when employed; lack of insurances; little savings; less access to reliable transportation; limited recreational options; less ability to purchase needed assistance of all sorts; greater political alienation; and so on (U.S. Department of Justice, 2007; Allegretto, 2006). Poor people are more likely to be blamed for problems, even when they are the victims of the problems themselves and had little to do with their creation (Cole, 1999; Ryan, 1971; McAll, 1990).

Poverty is often defined as either absolute deprivation or relative deprivation. Absolute deprivation occurs when one lacks access to the basics that are absolutely essential for human survival, such as food, housing, medical care, or adequate clothes. Relative deprivation exists when people are poor relative to the members of one's society. For instance, a person may have enough to eat and a place to stay, but lack the ability to purchase transportation, school supplies, or items that seem to be accessible to the majority of members of one's society.

Most people who are poor work at least part time, but their wages cannot keep up with the expenditures required for daily living. Typical expenses include housing, utilities, food, transportation, clothes, medical care, and other things. Add up what is required on a monthly basis, and people who are poor find that what they earn and what they owe are negatively correlated. The federal poverty guideline for a single person in 2009 was $10,830 and for a family of four, it was $22,050. A person who works a full-time, 40-hour minimum wage job at $7.25 will make $290 a week without benefits, or $1,160 a month before taxes, or $14,500 for 50 weeks a year, or below the poverty guidelines, especially if married or caring for children. According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, the average house in the United States in 2010 costs $272,000, and the average apartment monthly rent costs at least $1,000, so most people with minimum wage salaries will be greatly challenged to afford housing and everything else it takes in order to survive in today's world.

In a study of 24 developed nations, the United States was found to have the highest rate of child poverty—significantly so, as shown in Fig. 3.10. Marian Wright Edelman, director of the Children's Defense Fund in Washington, has concluded from analyzing poverty data that there is "a third world within" the United States (2008). People may think of challenging living conditions for people in the third world, or underdeveloped nations, where they may lack adequate food, shelter, medical care, and essentials for daily living. Wright Edelman has found that a quarter of children in the United States live below the poverty guidelines, and that the figure is disproportionately higher for nonwhite children. If a quarter of young people live in poverty, researchers can predict what may be logical social outcomes. In a study by Vissing (1997), it was found that housing distress or homelessness impacts about one in 10 people, and that any time housing costs absorb over half of the family's income, they are at risk of homelessness. Most people do not have savings accounts that would enable them to pay for more than two or three months of their expenses, should catastrophe occur (Vissing, 1997; United States Government, 2009; U.S. HUD, 2010; U.S. Government Bureau of Census, 2010).

Figure 3.10 Percentage of Children in Poverty in Developed Nations

From Peter Adamson, "Measuring child poverty," UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre's 2005 Report Card No. 6, Fig. 1a, p. 10, May 2012. Reprinted by permission.

Social Stratification Theories

Functionalist theorists find that social stratification systems are both useful and inevitable, for they are needed in order to keep society operating. They provide opportunities for individuals to use their skills and talents, and to be compensated for them. Stratification systems tend to be stable over time because they are supported by society's values and norms. The Davis-Moore thesis (1945) alleges that all societies exhibit some form of social inequality, and that inequality is functional for social systems because it provides job outlets in accordance with skill; meritocracy is systems of linking rewards to personal merit. In order to have the best-trained people in positions that can best use their skills, divisions of labor that are differentially compensated are important.

Conflict theorists view stratification systems as the result of social conflict and inequality that may not well use people's talents and abilities at all. Marx, Weber, and Mills state that the system enables some groups to pursue their own interests more easily than others, and that stratification is more useful to people in the upper strata. Values and norms are not inevitable but constructed to reflect the interests of the more powerful members of society. The disparity between the rich and poor has little to do with personal qualities and much more to do with a social construction of reality that benefits the elites at the expense of the poor. Symbolic interactionists focus on micro elements of society, and why certain people are labeled as more socially important than others. They also look at how behaviors and material objects get associated with particular social classes and thus take on symbolic meaning as a result.

     

     

3.6

 Relationship between Social Problems and Deviant Behavior

Deviant behavior and social problems have an inherent interrelationship. Social problems are macro-level problems; the study of deviants focuses more on individual-level problematic behavior. For instance, a society can view substance abuse as a social problem and institute laws and institutions to deal with it; a person who uses or deals drugs may be considered a deviant person. In another example, a person who belongs to a gang may be engaged in deviant behavior; when many gangs exist and disrupt normal social behavior for a significant group of people, the gang behavior is not just deviant on an individual level, but has become a social problem as well.

Social problems such as environmental pollution, racism, sexism, or war may not have a single, identifiable deviant person who caused them. But some critics point to individuals or groups who may have been responsible for the creation of the social problems. Did British Petroleum cause the social problems that resulted in environmental catastrophe in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, or was it oil companies in general, was it lack of governmental policies, was it environmentalists, was it the people who worked on the particular unit that caused the spill, or was it merely an unfortunate accident? It all depends on how one chooses to look at the issue. Do social problems cause individuals to become deviant—or do deviant people create social problems? This is part of an ongoing social debate about whether something or someone is a problem—and what society should do about it (Best, 2007; Goode, 2008; Liazos, 1972). Deviant behavior will now be explored.

Deviance is the recognized violation of cultural norms (Macionis, 2011). Deviant behaviors are individual, micro-level behaviors that are defined by either people in power, or a significant number of people, as problematic. Common types of deviant behaviors include acts such as crime, violence, drug abuse, and sexual promiscuity. What is considered deviant behavior, and who deviant people are presumed to be, is a product of the social construction of reality.

Why Does Deviance Exist? Theoretical Explanations

There are many different ways to view deviant behavior, since its determination is a product of social construction. Consider the example of a teen who is caught drinking alcohol at a school dance. The principal, teacher, police officer, parent, teen, and the teen's friends may all have different views of whether the teen is a deviant or not. They may not all agree about what should be done about the alcohol consumption. Whether they recognize it or not, each of them has their own interpretation, or theory, about the alcohol use. So what are the major sociological theories that attempt to explain deviance?

Biological and Psychological Explanations

Sometimes people rely on biological and psychological explanations for behavior that they suspect lies within the deviant person. Statements like "they must be sick," "they must be crazy," or "there must be something wrong with them" illustrate views that support either a biological or psychological theory of deviance. Scholars have long gone looking for internal causes of deviant behavior. For instance, Cesare Lombroso (1835–1909) theorized that criminals had distinct physical ape-like characteristics, such as low foreheads, large jaws, hairiness, and long arms. William Sheldon (1949) proposed that criminals had more muscular, athletic builds than non-criminals. Other theorists have looked at heredity, genetics, or chromosomal differences, such as an extra Y chromosome, DNA, or enzyme factors (Macionis, 2010; Goode, 2008). Some theorists feel that the cause of deviancy may reside not in the body, but in the mind, and they have looked for more psychological causes (Reckless, 1973). Benjamin Rush (1812) alleged that mental disorders caused lying and criminal behavior; Sigmund Freud felt most problems were a result of psychological issues; Albert Bandura focused on the importance of social learning; and Kohlberg studied moral development and its contribution to problematic behavior (Keel, 2010).

The Functionalist Perspective

Durkheim alleged that if we didn't have deviants, we would create them because we need them (Bellah, 1973). Why do we need deviant people? As a functionalist, Durkheim saw that having a certain group of people identified as rule breakers was important because it solidified the importance of the rules themselves. How can you know what the rules really are unless you have an example of someone who breaks them? When the norms are broken and there is a public response, then the community can really understand how to keep norms and what will happen to them if they don't. Negative sanctions inspire others to do what they're "supposed" to do.

Deviance occurs when there is a violation of the values and norms that affirm what a society deems desirable. A society's values and norms define what is important and how people are supposed to behave. They reaffirm the solidity of the community; society functions smoothly when the rules are clear and there is consensus about their implementation. When people deviate from the widely embraced norms and values, the community may react in such as way as to penalize the individual and try to bring them back into adherence with the community. When individuals violate the ways people are supposed to think and act, social groups may step in to help keep people in line. In sociological terms, functionalist theorists would remind us that it is important that (a) everyone know the rules of social living, and (b) everyone follow them. Societies exert a great deal of social control over people's actions, and also attempt to influence their thoughts and the way they look at things (Macionis, 2010).

The importance of sanctions. The way that society persuades people to do what they're "supposed" to do is through the use of sanctions. Sanctions are reinforcements that encourage certain types of behavior. The sanctions may be positive or negative, formal or informal (see table 3.5). Positive sanctions are reinforcements to encourage people to keep on doing the right thing. Informal positive sanctions occur in everyday interactions, and may consist of something as simple as a smile, when a parent tells a child "good job" for pouring milk into a cup, or when a boyfriend tells a girl "you look pretty." These positive statements motivate us to keep on doing whatever it was that evoked pleasant comments from others.

Getting fired is a formal negative sanction.

Conversely, negative sanctions are discouraging interactions designed to reprimand or punish us for behavior deemed as "bad," or to motivate us to change our behavior to something regarded as positive. These can occur informally, such as when a parent yells at a son for hitting his sister or when a boss reprimands a worker's performance as being inadequate. Usually people attempt to control the behavior of others through these informal means. But sometimes, behavior is regarded as so undesirable that the reprimand becomes formal and public. A worker may get fired and escorted out of the building by police officers; someone breaking the law may get arrested and thrown into jail. The ultimate negative formal sanction is when a person is deemed so awful that they don't even deserve to live, so they are put to death in a public execution.

Conversely, sometimes people do something so wonderful that they receive public acknowledgement and praise. US Airways pilot Chesley Sullenberger was publicly celebrated as a hero for saving all passengers on board when he had to make an emergency landing in the Hudson River. A hero may be given a parade and awarded the "key to the city"; a brave soldier may be awarded a medal. What positive formal sanction do you want out of this course? Maybe you want an A on your transcript so that people will forever know that you were smart in sociology.

Table 3.5 The Four Types of Sanctions

	Positive	Negative
Informal	Smile, pat on the back	Frown, criticize, push away
Formal	Prize, medal, ceremony	Get fired, jail, death penalty

Merton's strain theory. Robert K. Merton (1910–2003) examined normative and deviant behavior (1942). His theory became popular because it derived explanations of a diverse range of deviant behavior in a relatively simple analytical model. He found that who gets identified as deviant depends on how they adhere to important values and norms of a society. In other words, how do people support the goals of a society and the traditional means of achieving those goals? Individuals who adhere to the dominant values or norms of a society, and whose action or means of achieving those goals are in accordance with normatively prescribed behavior, are viewed as conformists. They follow the standards for how people are supposed to behave. For instance a dominant value or goal of contemporary American society is to be economically successful. The traditional means of achieving that goal is hard work. The conformist believes it is important to be successful so he does the traditional things to get ahead, such as graduating from college and working hard at a job.

In Merton's theoretical model, the innovator also believes that being economically successful is important, thus he adheres with that goal. However, the innovator does not engage in the traditional means of achieving that goal, and is thus considered deviant. Merton views innovation to be particularly characteristic of people who are of lower social class, because the traditional class structure in the United States makes access to legitimate means for success more limited for poor people than it is for those in upper classes. All members of society are driven to achieve material success, so the innovators use illegitimate but expedient means to overcome these structural obstacles. The innovator thus may look for other ways to be successful, such as dealing drugs, embezzling, stealing, or engaging in other forms of crime. The innovator may choose these actions because there are no jobs or the person cannot afford to go to school.

A ritualist is an individual who does not adhere to the goals of the society but continues to act in socially normative ways. Merton finds that this type of adaptation is most likely to occur within the lower middle class of society where socialization practices emphasize rigid conformity to rules. Ritualists can be found in many organizations in lower-rung positions where they have little chance for success and deny that they have aspirations for advancement, yet are rigidly preoccupied with the ritual of accomplishing tasks by the book. In the economic success example, the ritualist has given up on trying to achieve economic success, thinking it is unattainable, but rigidly sticks to the means of working hard as a way of life in and of itself.

The retreatist accepts neither the traditionally supported social goals nor the customary means of achieving them. Merton applies this deviant role to explain actions of psychotics, pariahs, outcasts, vagrants, vagabonds, tramps, chronic drunkards, and drug addicts. In our example of economic success, a retreatist could be someone who has decided that economic success is an unacceptable value and decided to be a hermit, live in the woods, or off the grid without the benefits of a regular job, electricity, or material possessions.

The rebel, according to Merton, not only rejects the goals and means of society but also actively substitutes new goals and means in their place. The rebel is regarded as a unique form of deviant because he or she attempts to modify the existing structure of society. The rebel publicly acknowledges his or her intention to change societal goals and means that institutions use for achieving those goals. Often, the rebel does this out of frustration with the existing social order to create a better, more just society. Rebellion often comes with new political ideologies and promotes changing social structures, social values, and objectives. Karl Marx regarded rebellion as a logical result in oppressive states; uprisings in Egypt and Libya are current-day examples of rebels who seek new goals and means to improve the condition for people in those societies.

Table 3.6 Ways People Adapt to Socially Supported Goals and Objectives

Method of Behavior	Adherence to Goals	Adhere to Means of Achieving Goals
Conformist (non-deviant)	Accept	Accept
Innovator	Accept	Reject
Ritualist	Reject	Accept
Retreatist	Reject	Reject
Rebel	Reject/replace	Reject/replace

Deviant subcultures. Deviance can occur when people are surrounded by others who support deviant attitudes and who can teach them deviant acts and techniques. Groups of like-minded individuals may join to support the existence of a behavior that society regards as deviant or problematic. While these subgroups adhere to most of the dominant rules of society, they provide emotional support, justifications, and rationalizations for unorthodox behavior. Members may develop their own language or terminology, wear recommended attire, and build an entire culture to isolate themselves from the rest of the world. These subcultures reinforce justifications for rule-breaking.

Richard Cloward and Lloyd Ohlin (1966) maintained that deviance and conformity reflect an individual's access to relative opportunity structures. Edwin Sutherland (1940) coined the term differential association to refer to the process by which people learn to engage in deviant behavior through socialization by those already engaged in or supportive of such behavior. Deviance, including criminal behavior, is a behavior that one learns through interaction with others. There is a perceived benefit to be gained from the association with deviant others, such as access to more wealth, prestige, or power. Sutherland talks about priority (what the relationship of the person is to us, since family and friends will have more influence over us than casual acquaintances), duration (how much contact we have with them on a regular basis), and intensity (how important those people are to us) as major contributors of deviant behavior.

The more people associate with "deviants," the more emotionally, socially, or financially important they are, and the more people who are like them in their primary group, the more likely an individual is to learn techniques, skills, and justifications for breaking the law or engaging in potentially troublesome behavior. This is true whether people engage in white collar crime like embezzlement and tax evasion, or in street crimes like car theft. People calculate the costs and benefits and choose whether to engage in behaviors that could be problematic for others. Walter Reckless (1973) asserted that when people are highly influenced by rule breakers, their communities have weak enforcement systems, and if they lack strong internal control, they will be predisposed to engage in deviant behavior. Travis Hirschi (1969) sees most deviants as normal, rational people who have made calculated decisions about breaking the law or engaging in behaviors that may cause others misery. Our attachment, commitment, involvement, and beliefs all influence whether we are more likely to become deviants or conformists. From their cost-benefit analysis, the risks of getting caught and severely punished are simply not great enough to keep them from engaging in behaviors that can yield significant benefits. Subcultures, whether we are discussing corporate or street crime, socialize others into deviant behavior.

The Conflict Perspective

Some people engage in deviant behavior but are never called deviant. Why? The conflict approach to analyzing deviant behavior assumes that who or what is labeled "deviant" depends on which categories of people hold power in a society. Alexander Liazos (1972) argues that the people who are usually labeled as deviant are poor and powerless because it is the rich and powerful who make the laws. The affluent also have the ability to hide their own misbehaviors while having the rules against the powerless enforced. Liazos alleges that visible drug users or "nuts, sluts, and perverts" are more likely to be targeted as deviants, while elites who engage in the same behavior behind closed doors of penthouses are not. Macionis (2010) notes that bag ladies and unemployed men on the street are perceived to be deviant, but corporate polluters and international arms dealers are not.

Is it fair to consider the homeless deviant?

Marx argued that social institutions and laws are designed by the rich to support the interests of the capitalist class. Those with little power are easy to target as deviants because they can do little about it, and it takes the attention off the elites engaged in wrongdoing. Spitzer (1975) alleges that deviant labels are often applied to people who interfere with capitalistic interests. Because capitalism is based on private control of property, people who threaten the property of others, such as poor people who steal from the rich, are prime candidates for being called deviant. Conversely, the rich who take advantage of the poor, such as slum landlords, are not likely to be called criminals because they are just doing business. People who cannot or do not work are likely to be called deviant, as are people who resist authority, such as those who don't cooperate with parents, teachers, employers, or the police. Anyone who challenges the capitalist status quo may be defined as deviant, such as labor organizers, anti-war activists, or environmental advocates. Those who make lots of money and express support for the values and norms endorsed by the status quo are likely to be rewarded in their positions, such as celebrities, politicians, or executives. This theory helps explain why white collar crime is seldom perceived to be a social problem, and why the public is socialized to view poor, minorities, and radicals who challenge the dominant social institutions as deviant.

The identification of deviant behavior is sometimes a prelude to a larger discussion about social problems. It is always easier to blame an individual or a group of people for the creation of a behavior that we do not like than it is to attack a large-scale social unit. People are identifiable; who exactly is responsible for a problem within a complex social organization is much harder to pinpoint. Institutions may actually be the cause of social and personal problems, but often the focus of attention is on an individual level since they are easier to identify and attack. For instance, it is easier to focus on the suicide bomber than it is to address the large-scale social conditions that underlie terrorism. It is easier to focus on the homeless person than to address the underlying issues of economic inequality in a society. From a conflict point of view, social institutions and the elites who benefit from them have the ability to sway public opinion away from looking at them as deviants and their organizations as the cause of problematic behavior. Blaming the victims or those who are socially powerless to combat them is an effective way of masking when elite individuals, corporations, or governments are responsible for harmful action. For example, protestors in Egypt, Tunisia, and Libya are demanding changes of governmental leadership. The downtrodden in those nations may regard them as heroes. But some of the governments have regarded the protestors as deviants and enemies of the state.

The Symbolic Interactionist Perspective

This family of theorists believes that deviance and conformity arise in the response of others. Deviance can be anything; small acts may be considered to be deviant while important problems may be ignored. Deviance resides not in the act or actor, but in the eyes of the viewer.

Deviance is any behavior that people so label. Not all members of a society will identify a particular behavior or a certain person as deviant. There may be controversy about whether certain behaviors are good, bad, right, or wrong. As Howard Becker, a symbolic interaction theorist, stated, what is perceived as a social problem or deviant behavior may be "any behavior that people so label." This means that under the right set of circumstances, anyone and anything could be identified as a deviant or a social problem. Becker (1966) argued the deviance is created not in the act but in the mind of the actor, or how a social group views it.

If deviants can be anyone that people so label, are people who smoke cigarettes, who have tattoos, who have same-sex relationships, or who live off-the-grid, normal or deviant? What about businessmen who make millions of dollars by deluding consumers, or companies that price-gouge the government? It all depends on who is doing the labeling. One of the premiere points in deviance theory is that anyone could be perceived to be deviant, depending on the social conditions and who is placing the label on them. People in positions of power and influence are more likely to have their labels stick, as compared to people who are in powerless positions. People who are in powerful positions may choose not to label something, or someone, as deviant when it conflicts with their interests. The reaction to what is considered a deviant behavior may or may not be directly related to the actual harm it poses. Sometimes people who pose great harm are not identified as problematic while other times people are regarded as deviant or situations defined as social problems when they pose minimal risk to large numbers of people. Who is considered deviant, and what is considered a social problem, is the result of a complex social process.

Applying Sociology

The Arrest of Henry Louis Gates

As an example of the labeling theory, when Henry Louis Gates came home after a trip to China and found his door jammed, he asked his limo driver to help force the door open. This was observed by a White woman who called Boston area police and reported a break-in. Gates was quickly surrounded by police who arrested him. The police said they were merely doing their duty; Gates felt he was the victim of bigotry and racial profiling.

Professor Gates earned his MA and PhD in English literature from Clare College at the University of Cambridge, and his BA summa cum laude in history from Yale University, where he was a Scholar of the House. Before joining the faculty of Harvard, where he is director of the W. E. B. Du Bois Institute for African American research, he taught at Yale, Cornell, and Duke. His honors and grants include a MacArthur Foundation "genius grant" (1981), the George Polk Award for Social Commentary (1993), Time magazine's "25 Most Influential Americans" list (1997), a National Humanities Medal (1998), election to the American Academy of Arts and Letters (1999), the Jefferson Lecture (2002), a Visiting Fellowship at the School of Social Science at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton (2003–2004), the Jay B. Hubbell Award for Lifetime Achievement in American Literary Studies from the Modern Language Association (2006), the Rave Award from Wired Magazine (2007), the Let's Do It Better Award from the Columbia University School of Journalism for African American Lives (2007), and the Cultures of Peace Award from the City of the Cultures of Peace (2007). He is the first African American to receive the Andrew Mellon Foundation Fellowship, has received forty-nine honorary degrees, and is a literary critic, author, educator, editor, scholar, and host of the PBS miniseries African American Lives.

The intersection of race and class became a complicating variable in this case. Was Gates arrested primarily because he was a Black male? Was the case dropped and an apology given after he was identified as a member of a high social class? How would his treatment have been different if he was a poor Black man? If two White people were trying to gain entry into the house, would anyone else have suspected illegal activity? This case brought up many salient social questions for exploration (Thompson, 2009; Gates, 1988).

 

Questions to Consider

1. What theory do you think best explains the police officer's response to Dr. Gates?
2. How were the social factors of race and class used in the analysis of the situation?.
3. Do you think that Dr. Gates was a victim of racial profiling?
4. What do you think can be done to avoid racial profiling?

Stigmatization. When individuals violate culturally endorsed norms, taboos, and laws, they may be shunned by others and ostracized with the intention to make them feel bad, unworthy, or alienated. This process is called stigmatization. A stigma is an attribute that transforms a normal person into one who is discounted (Goffman, 1963). Has anyone ever called you an unpleasant name? Have you ever called someone else names? Often the goal of name calling is to ruin someone's reputation and to encourage others to keep away from them. Sometimes in religious communities people who are regarded as sinners are shunned by members of the church; a person labeled as a traitor may be ostracized at work or in the community. In the Puritan days, rule-breakers were put in public stockades (see photo) for everyone to see. When someone has broken the law, gone to jail, and paid their dues to society, they continue to be called an ex-con when they get out. Calling someone "the divorcee" can be designed to discredit a woman's desirability as a mate; announcing that someone has AIDS may make people nervous around them; saying that someone is a liar and a thief may deter people from trusting them as a friend.

Primary and secondary deviance.Sociologists acknowledge that the public may not focus on the right unit of analysis—in our attempt to make the world better, we may accidentally attack the wrong source of the problem either because we don't see the real cause, or because people have a vested interest in seeing situations from a particular point of view. Turning back to the alcohol-as-deviance example, is it the drinking that is the problem or other behaviors that get associated with it, such as drunk driving, getting into fights, or losing one's job? Edwin Lemert (1912–1996) (1972) proposes that there is a primary act of deviance, but often it isn't the primary act that is the problem—it is the secondary outcomes. The social context in which a behavior initially occurs, how people react to it, and subsequent behavior resulting from it are all considerations in whether something is defined as problematic. Lemert's work implies that sometimes efforts to control deviants and social problems don't work because we focus on the wrong thing. If we change how we respond to the primary act, then secondary acts may not occur.

An example of public stigmatization.

My favorite example of primary and secondary deviance occurred when I was in elementary school and a little boy on the playground was trying to give his classmates grass cigarettes. The teacher heard he had marijuana on him. Upset, she dragged the kid to the principal's office, where he was ordered to pull out the drugs. The child refused. Knowing that it was illegal to manhandle the student, the principal called the child's parents and police, who came and demanded the child empty his pockets. When he did, the police, parents, principal, and teacher saw the cigarettes—schoolyard grass that he had wrapped in blue-lined white binder paper. Embarrassed, the adults harshly reprimanded the boy and punished him. The following weekend, in retaliation, he broke the teacher's office window and he set fire to some papers in her trashcan. The fire department came and the boy was charged with arson.

The secondary act of deviance, arson, was substantially more severe than the primary act—trying to pretend he was "cool" by having "grass" on him. As Lemert's theory can be applied, had the initial act been handled differently, the secondary act would likely never have occurred. This theory is quite useful to remember. If we label an act as "deviant" when it really could be defined in other, less stigmatizing ways, then we can avoid the creation of more serious problems and bad feelings between people.

Deviance varies from time to time and place to place. There is significant temporal and cultural variability when it comes to whether or not something is considered problematic. Consider hair length—the Beatles were thought to have very long hair in the early 1960s, but by today's standards they were clean-cut, even wearing suits and ties. Cigarette smoking today is outlawed in many public places where it was routinely allowed for years before. Alcohol consumption is now illegal in the United States for a 20-year-old but not a 21-year-old, while 18-year-olds can legally drink across the borders in Mexico and Canada. Someone age 15 can legally drink in Tunisia, while one must be 25 in parts of India, and in many Muslim countries alcohol consumption is forbidden for all people of any age.

The visibility of a behavior also influences whether something will be perceived as a deviance. Not everyone who participates in deviant behavior gets targeted as a deviant or a problem person. The more visible the behavior, the more likely it is to be targeted as a problem. The more a rule breaker disregards the norms of society, the more likely it is that person will be considered a deviant. This means that invisible rule breakers will not be identified or penalized.

Medicalization of deviant behavior. Sometimes people who are alcoholics, mentally ill, or criminals are regarded in ways that label them as sinners or as people who have been morally corrupt and therefore deserving of punishment. Asylums were created that mixed in people with biological, mental, and social problems, and the "treatments" they received were often inhumane (Goffman, 1961; Conrad, 1992). Today, people with behavioral problems are sometimes treated within a medical model, in which they may receive pharmacological remedies, psycho-emotional therapeutic treatments, or social adaptations. Alcoholism is now regarded as a disease, sexual issues can be managed with the use of drugs, depression and anxiety are now seen as forms of mental illness, and criminal behavior is thought to be controlled through mixed methods of medication and counseling. When people are sick with a broken leg, the flu, or cancer, they may receive sympathy for a short period of time, but then they get more pressure to get well because their 'deviant' behavior is inconvenient to others. Virtually any behavior can now be attributed to a medical condition. This view has both proponents and critics, depending on their theoretical framework. See table 3.7 for a summary of deviance theories.

Table 3.7 Deviance Theories

	Functionalist	Conflict	Symbolic Interaction
Level of Analysis	Macro	Macro	Micro
Cause of Deviance	Universal, found in all societies	Political, rich people less likely to be perceived as deviant	Deviance is variable; any behavior or person can be deviant
Purpose of Deviance	Reaffirms values and norms	Interests of status quo are protected	Interaction dynamics occur in labeling process

Common Types of Deviant Behavior

Earlier in this module, a variety of social problems were discussed. The perpetrators of any of those social problems could be perceived as deviant. These include criminals such as murderers, rapists, street criminals, juvenile delinquents, or white collar criminals. Racists may be perceived by some as deviant. As Liazos points out, the study of deviant behavior often focuses upon "nuts, sluts, and perverts" because society is fascinated by substance abusers, people who are mentally ill, and people who exhibit non-normative sexual behavior. This module does not seek to list each and every type of deviant behavior or person, but provides a conceptual framework from which one can better analyze them.

Substance abuse. Drug abuse is a serious public health problem that affects almost every community and family in some way. Each year drug abuse results in around 40 million serious illnesses or injuries in the United States. According to the National Institute of Drug Abuse, drug abuse and addiction are a major burden to society. Estimates of the total overall costs of substance abuse in the United States—including health- and crime-related costs as well as losses in productivity—exceed half a trillion dollars annually. This includes approximately $181 billion for illicit drugs, $168 billion for tobacco, and $185 billion for alcohol (ONDCP, 2004; CDC, 2007). Substance abuse is associated with a host of other problems, such as family disintegration, loss of employment, lack of performance or failure in school, domestic violence, child abuse, and other crimes (National Institute of Drug Abuse 2011).

Some substances are physically addictive, and users' bodies will crave them, or they will experience tolerance for the drug, meaning they will need more and more of it in order to get the same high. When one is physically addicted, there will be signs of withdrawal when one does not have it. Sometimes people are not physically addicted, but they are psychologically. This means they feel they need the drug, even when they really don't. People may go for extended periods of time without using the substance but still consider themselves to be addicted to it.

Alcohol, tobacco, and caffeine are the most commonly used drugs in America. They are easily obtainable and all have known psycho-physiological effects that can cause biological harm when taken to excess. The legal status of alcohol and tobacco has changed over time, sometimes being seen as glamorous and desirable while other times being portrayed as disease- and risk-producing. They have created a wholesale industry surrounding their manufacturing and distribution and have quality controls and regulations to ensure that people are getting the same product at the same composition, time after time. For instance, the wine country of California is tightly regulated, as are distilleries and breweries across the nation. They also provide taxable income for society. The penalties for overconsumption of these are generally minimal, with the exception of penalties for multiple episodes of drunk driving.

Substance abuse is a significant problem in modern society.

The study of substance abuse is also a study of inconsistencies in social attitudes. Alcohol, while addictive and destructive, has a veneer of acceptability, while cocaine does not. Celebrities or elites in mansions may use drugs and make it seem glamorous, but if poor people living in dilapidated housing use drugs, they are demeaned. Mixed messages are given particularly to tobacco and alcohol. On one hand, they are touted to be dangerous to one's health and well-being; on the other hand, they are legal and easily accessible and affordable for adults. There is also a fine line between use and abuse that complicates the social attitude issue of whether substances are a problem or not. Abuse can occur with the use of both legal as well as illegal substances. Whether for recreational purposes, relaxation, self-medication, or with a physician's authorization, most people use a variety of substances but few want to think of themselves as abusers. Most people prefer to consider themselves as consumers. Where is the line when responsible drug use becomes drug abuse? This determination is a process of social construction.

There is also a long list of other legal drugs, often of an herbal nature, that can be used for self-medication. Men with prostate trouble may use saw palmetto and people with depression may use St. John's wort. Today people may use Kava, betel nut, or katrom, for example, to evoke altered states of consciousness. The Food and Drug Administration debates to what extent these substances, as well as vitamins, should be regulated. Many of these are controversial as well. Any substance, legal or not, can be abused if enough of it is used.

Substances that are legal and acceptable in one location may not be in another. In Muslim countries, and in some dry counties in the United States, alcohol is never to be consumed, so even if a person has a single glass of red wine this could be considered an abuse. If a person is using marijuana to deal with nausea and side effects of cancer chemotherapy, he may be defined as using the drug for medicinal purposes, but if he is self-medicating he may be arrested. Sometimes the lines are quite unclear.

Illegal drug use. The term "illegal drug" has various meanings, with different drugs having different pharmacological-economic-psycho-social effects. Instead of generically pushing all of them into a single category, it is helpful to learn more about the etiology (or cause) and consequences of each. Marijuana is the most widely used of all illegal drugs, with about 7% of teenagers stating they have smoked it within the last month, according to a 2007 National Survey of Drug Use and Health. Other major illegal substances at this time in the United States include stimulants like amphetamines, cocaine, and crack; depressants like heroin, codeine, and barbiturates; hallucinogenic-type drugs and ecstasy; and inhalants. There is little quality control or cost containment for street drugs. When drugs are manufactured and distributed illegally, they can be tainted with additives that are not healthy, or they can be altered and combined with other substances so one doesn't really know exactly what one is consuming. The illegal status of certain drugs is at the center of overdose problems, and the expense of the drugs may contribute to secondary forms of crime, such as stealing or selling drugs in order to make money to purchase them. Some street drugs are prescription drugs that are sold on the street instead of through the pharmacy.

Prescription drug use. Medicines save lives. Before the creation of antibiotics, people died from diseases that now are manageable. The creation of new pharmaceutical drugs has improved and saved lives, and it is estimated by the United States Department of Health and Human Services that about 50% of Americans are on at least one drug and spend over $200 billion a year on prescription drugs. Prescription drug use may become a social problem when people obtain prescriptions from multiple providers, when they self-medicate and use the drugs improperly, or when they purchase them from illegitimate health care providers. A Journal of the American Medical Association study found that over 106,000 people die from medication side effects per year—or 300 deaths a day, which is more than most airline deaths per year (Paulozzi & Annhest, 2007; U.S. HHS, 2003).

Mental Illness

The topic of mental illness is a particularly controversial one in the field of sociology. Sociologists such as Szasz (1974) and Bowers (2008) allege that most mental illness is a myth, a product of social construction and labeling of behaviors that other people find troublesome. Other experts feel mental illness usually has a genetic component and that it is real indeed (NAMI, 2011; NIMH, 2011). To be sure, some people have been accused of being "crazy" when they are quite normal, or who are trying to be sane in an insane world. But given the numbers of people who are afflicted with mental disorders, it appears that social conditions are contributing to the incidence of illnesses such as depression and anxiety. But there may be other causal factors as well, and these are currently under investigation by experts, including those at the National Institute of Mental Health. Theories about mental illness are in flux as new scientific developments are made.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health (2011), mental disorders are so common as to be considered normative in the United States and throughout the world. They estimate that over 26% of Americans age 18 and older, or one in four adults, suffer from a diagnosable mental illness, and that up to half of the population may have a mental illness sometime during their life. This translates to almost 58 million people suffering from mental illness in the United States. Mental disorders are the leading cause of disability in the United States. Depression and anxiety are the most common diagnosis, with about 40 million people afflicted with anxiety and almost 15 million people suffering from depression. While schizophrenia affects about two million Americans, this equates to only about 1% of the population.

Mental illnesses are more common than cancer, diabetes, or heart disease. Mental illnesses do not discriminate and can be found in men and women, adults, teens, elderly, and children, in any race, any ethnic group, and in all socioeconomic statuses. Many can be prevented, reliably diagnosed, and successfully treated. Lack of treatment, access, and affordability make the conditions worse. See figure 3.11 for information on mental illness prevalence in the U.S.

According to the World Health Organization, almost 3,000 people commit suicide every day somewhere in the world, and for every death there are twenty attempts. The global suicide rate is up 60% in the last 50 years, with an even greater increase in the developed world. Suicide is among the top three causes of death among people 15–34 years old. Worldwide, it causes more deaths each year than homicide or war.

Sex Crimes

Sexual interaction may be socially controlled for age of partners, type of sexual contact, location where it occurs, and consent. The most common forms are:

Figure 3.11 States with the Highest Incidence of Mental Illness

Serious mental illness in past year among persons aged 26 or older, by state. Percentages, annual averages based on 2002 and 2003 NSDUHs.

Prostitution. Referred to as the world's oldest profession, its status depends on where you live. For instance, it is considered a legitimate profession in Germany and the Netherlands, where it is regulated by the state; is considered a crime in many nations, especially Islamic ones; and is seen as a form of exploitation throughout most of the world. It is frequently a service that people frown upon but do little about. It continues to be a regularly used profession, is a part of a large sex industry, and may take a variety of forms, including street prostitution, massage brothels, escort services, outcall services, strip clubs, lap dancing, phone sex, adult and child pornography, video and Internet pornography, and prostitution tourism.

Sex tourism, sex trafficking, and sex slavery. These activities are common in many parts of the world, and while they are typically associated with Southeast Asia and Latin America, they occur within the United States as well (Raymond & Hughes, 2001). The nonprofit organization End Child Prostitution, Child Pornography and the Trafficking of Children (ECPAT) estimates that over a million children enter the sex trade industry each year. Many poor children and women are lured into this industry. Most who enter it receive only pennies from what is charged, while the people who sell the children in sexual servitude may make $20,000 for each person they deliver to the industry. The United Nations has attempted to develop global treaties and laws to protect such children and women, but even when laws are on the books, it is up to the local authorities to enforce them. The United Nations' report on global crime and justice estimates that there are over 100,000 illegal immigrant prostitutes in the United States, 50,000 Thai women illegally working as prostitutes in Japan, and a half million in Eastern Europe, a pattern that is seen on almost every continent on the planet. The usual customers in the sex industry are wealthy men from industrialized nations.

Is this art or pornography?

Pornography.The lines between art and pornography sometimes are debated, but pornography is defined as explicit sexual matter created for the purposes of sexual excitement and erotic satisfaction. How big is the pornography industry? Estimates range from $520 million to $14 billion depending on what is counted. Pornography may include adult videos, magazines, Internet, pay-per-view, sex toys, and phone sex, to name a few types. Viewing the sexualized human body is not new, as a trip to India's Khajuraho temples, built in 1150, would testify. Attitudes toward viewing pornography vary considerably, with some viewing the human body as the ultimate, natural, and most beautiful art form, while others view it as a form of exploitation and degradation. The porn industry has grown to include both males and females in heterosexual and same-sex contexts. Some target specific types of people, races, or body shapes, but few types have received as much condemnation globally as child pornography. Use of children in sexualized situations is a multimillion-dollar global business (Finkelhor, 1994; TopTenReviews 2004). Viewing of children is usually defined as a more disturbing behavior because of a perceived association with child sexual abuse.

Status Offenses

Sometimes deviance is defined differently according to age. Status offenses occur when youth violate rules that would not constitute an offense for someone who was older. For instance, at age 18, someone can buy and drink alcohol in Mexico, but across the border in California, he cannot. If someone under age 18 is driving home at 2:00 a.m., that person may be arrested if there is a curfew in place that mandates minors being at home by midnight. Similarly, one cannot consume tobacco, buy a lottery ticket, or gamble when underage. Loitering and truancy are other reasons that youth can find themselves in trouble, even though older people would not.

Are These Deviant?

Whether someone is considered deviant and whether something is considered to be a social problem is a product of social debate and social construction. When there is little consensus on actions, debates may rage within both public and professional arenas. Some topics currently under debate include abortion, body art, self-hurt, and suicide. Abortion is seen as murder by one group of individuals, while others see it as a hard but wise choice so that children can be born into welcoming homes (Allan Guttmacher Institute, 1996). Tattoos and body piercings are regarded by one group of people as forms of self mutilation but are regarded as forms of body art by others. Self-hurt is a behavior that an individual chooses that is not necessarily intended to hurt others. Major forms include cutting, scarring, and other forms of body mutilation. While self-harm may not physically hurt other people, when people commit or attempt suicide, those who care for them may experience devastation, distress, despair, and depression. Other individuals indicate that people have a right to end their lives when they are ill or no longer desire to live. Websites and materials exist that teach people how to die, which some groups feel is freedom of information while others feel should be banned because of the danger they pose.

     

     

Ch 3

 Summary

The study of social problems and deviant behavior is an analysis of why certain types of behaviors are deemed problematic and why others are not. It is therefore a study of "us" as well as a study of "those people." There are some behaviors that would generate social consensus about their danger (e.g., murder), but there are many other behaviors that are controversial (abortion, gay rights, drug use) because their risk is not perceived the same way by all groups.

Many individuals who are perceived to be deviant, or the cause of social problems, are also those who are the most vulnerable in society, those who have access to the least amount of influence and opportunity. People who are negatively stigmatized are often labeled and blamed as the cause of social problems when this association may not be true at all. Conversely, corrupt elites have been able to escape identification as deviants and perpetrators of social problems because they are often in a better situation to manipulate the social system.

As the world begins to grapple with long-standing environmental, social, and political problems, the issue of how to prioritize problems to attack is a worthwhile consideration. All societies have limited resources with which to prevent social problems or curtail their impact. Whether societies will focus on problems based on race, gender, or nationality will be an important decision that will impact the future. Discussions about whether to spend significant funds and energy to address victimless crimes, in comparison to crimes that harm individuals, could be a worthwhile debate. The middle class is shrinking as more people are pushed to the lower rungs of the stratification ladder. The war between the haves and the have-nots has always existed, but data would indicate that it may be exacerbating new tensions both here and abroad (Allen & Dimock, 2007).

Web Links

The impact of gender is explored at this multifaceted international website that is sure to be of interest. http://www.eldis.org/gender/

To learn more about the effects of particular drugs, go to http://www.samhsa.gov/.

The Death Penalty Information Center is a nonprofit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information on issues concerning capital punishment. The center was founded in 1990 and prepares in-depth reports, issues press releases, conducts briefings for journalists, and serves as a resource to those working on this issue. Death Penalty Information Center. http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

The mission of the National White Collar Crime Center (NW3C) is to provide training, investigative support, and research to agencies and entities involved in the prevention, investigation, and prosecution of economic and high-tech crime. The National White Collar Crime Center can be found at http://www.nw3c.org/

To learn more about how the U.S. government seeks to protect workers from discrimination, visit the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission site at http://www.EEOC.gov

To learn more about the worldwide problem of human trafficking, go to http://www.humantrafficking.org/

Discussion Questions

1. What do you think are the most important problems facing society today, and what do you think could be done to alleviate them?
2. False consciousness prohibits us from seeing what is actually going on. What are some times that you thought you were right about something, only to learn later that you were mistaken? Why did you believe something that you found wasn't true?
3. Why do people talk in disparaging ways about others? What do you think they want to accomplish by casting others in a negative light?
4. Data on social stratification indicates that the top 5% of the population makes more than most of the rest of America combined. Do you think this is fair? Why or why not?
5. Minority group members experience more personal and structural discrimination than dominant group members. Have you ever felt you were treated unfairly because of your race, religion, gender, sexual preference, appearance, or some other factor? How did it feel? Why do you think it happened?
6. Deviance has been defined as "any behavior that people so label." Have you engaged in deviant behavior? Do you think that all deviant behavior is bad? Are some deviant behaviors more troublesome to you than others?
7. Becker states that how we view social problems and deviant behavior depends on whose side we are on. Whose side are you on when it comes to (a) gay rights; (b) tax breaks for the wealthy; (c) free mental health care for all; (d) immigration rights; and (e) services to help the homeless?
8. Most people are afraid of being the victims of crime. According to the data, to what type of crime are you most likely to become a victim?