![]() The term “labeling theory” is frequently used interchangeably with the “interactionist” approach to deviance and “societal reaction theory”. While labeling theory is a broad perspective on all sorts of deviance (e.g., mental illness, crime, welfare dependency) it emerged as a critique of mainstream approaches in criminology that focused on psychological, biological, and environmental causes of crime. ![]() They become a self-fulfilling prophecy: an individual who is labeled has little choice but to conform to the essential meaning of that judgment. My sociology book places Merton's Strain Theory under. Individuals labeled deviant can experience a number of psychological and social consequences by being labeled, including the cultivation of deviant identity, increased likelihood of further involvement in deviant behavior, stigma, and blocked opportunities for social advancement. Labeling theory hypothesizes that the labels applied to individuals influence their behavior, particularly that the application of negative or stigmatizing labels promotes deviant behavior. Perspectives on deviance: Differential association, labeling theory, and strain theory. Deviance is a designation-a label-that is attached to some individuals and not others. Labeling theory argues that society assigns labels to certain groups and individuals that may influence their behavior. When an individual in the society is labelled as criminal, it compels him to commit more crimes. Theory suggest that, people tend to act and behave as they are labeled by other people. We need a spiritual unification, in my opinionsomething that transcends our petty squabbling natures.Labeling theory views deviance as a product of the social interaction between individuals and various types of audience, such as parents, peer groups, anonymous onlookers, and, perhaps most extensively, representatives of formal social control organizations. Labeling Theory by kdkasi Deviance and Social Control Labeling theory view deviance from symbolic interaction and conflict perspective. He was the first to suggest that deviant labeling satisfies that function and satisfies societys need to control the behavior. Durkheim found that crime is not so much a violation of a penal code as it is an act that outrages society. ![]() We need something to unite usnot divide us. Labeling theory attributes its origins to French sociologist Émile Durkheim and his 1897 book, Suicide. On the contrary, on see them as simply perpetuating the system of conflict. Talking about race is like playing right into their trap, isnt it? I do not agree with Hooks (n.d.) that these conversations are necessary for building community. Yet all this organization does is talk about raceand there it is: an organization that has its roots in a racist ideology of a powerful white woman uses race as a system of powerwhile saying it is helping the marginalized and oppressed even as it is working to keep them marginalized and oppressed.įor that reason, I find the whole topic of race to be disgusting. I deal with labels a lot myself, for example I am a college student, and an older generation would expect me to party a lot, drink on weekends, and of course take a bunch of classes. It is what Margaret Sanger wanted to do during the American Eugenics program, when she viewed minorities as undesirables who should be prevented from breedingan idea that then was picked up in Planned Parenthood. Out of all the theories and perspectives, and it may be because of my youth but, I have connected the most with the labelist theory. Race plays right into the idea of labeling theory, after all, which is exactly what Oluo (n.d.) is talking about: powerful people want to use labels to maintain their own power while denying others who have the wrong label. If one refuses to talk about race, to acknowledge racethat construct of race that is used to empower some at the expense of others now is without air and becomes lifeless and incapable of doing what those in power want it to do. If race is a system of power designed to benefit some at the expense of others, as Ijeomo Oluo (n.d.) states in her speech at Google, maybe we shouldnt be talking about race at all? Why talk about a subject that is only there in order to exalt some people and marginalize and oppress others? If that is how race is going to be used, why not just refuse to talk about race? Then that power play is no longer on the table: it is no longer an option.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |