Deviance: A Good Thing?

More often than not our society places too much emphasis on the negative aspects of social deviance. This disdain may be observed through our media’s scapegoating of various religious radicals, different sexual orientations, drug addicted celebrities, and other people or groups of people that tend to swim upstream to society’s mainstream. “We define deviance as ‘behavior which violates institutionalized expectations, that is, expectations which are shared and recognized as legitimate within a social system’” (Cohen, 1959). Why does deviance have to be a bad thing? With a better understanding of the underlying causes behind group deviance, violations of majority statutes may be seen in an entirely new light.

Paralleling Dentler and Erikson’s propositions of deviant behavior as a group maintenance tool, I believe deviance can and does have a very positive impact on society and social evolution.

1) The first thing that came to mind as I read Dentler and Erikson’s first proposition that groups “tend to induce, sustain, and permit deviant behavior”, was a sketch by comedian Dane Cook (Dentler and Erikson, 1959). So I’m not technically savvy enough to insert an audio track into this blog so I would like you to imagine the voice of Dane Cook (look him up on youtube “Dane Cook The Friend that Nobody Likes”) and listen ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl9VxVmXAxs) :

“So I'm hangin' out with all of my buddies, and uh, I realize something,

I realize something. Think of the group of people you've known

the longest in your life. Think of the group of friends you've hung out

with the most, maybe you're all here tonight.

And this is what I realized, I had an epiphany, and here it is, right here:

There is one person, in every group of friends, that nobody fu----- likes.

You basically keep them there, to hate their guts.

When that person is not around the rest of your little base camp,

your hobby, is cutting that person down.

Example: "Karen, is always a douchebag."

Every group has a Karen and she is always a bag of douche.

And when she's not around, you just look at each other and say,

"God, Karen, she's such a douchebag!".

Until she walks up, then you're like,

"Hey, what's up Kar-? Kar-. What's up

Kar-?"

There's always that one person - and I'm lookin' out and some of guys

are like "Umm, I disagree."

Well you're the person - You're the person nobody likes.” (Dane Cook)

The humor of this sketch relies on the fact that the majority of it is true. I know at least within my group of close friends, there is one individual who constantly causes fights and drama, but we keep her in our group regardless of the conscious reasons as to why. How is this a good thing? Well, take “Karen” out of the situation. Imagine what would happen if there were no individual to scapegoat. Maybe your only ties to certain other friends within that group mostly originate from a common dissatisfaction with all who is Karen. I’m not saying forming relationships on the basis of a common dislike is a good thing, but it does benefit social evolution by drawing together individuals who may have nothing else in common.

2)

Dentler and Erikson’s second proposition asserts that deviance is a way to maintain balance and equilibrium within the group. Thinking about this blog the other day, I asked my friend what our world would be like without Karen’s, shoe-bombers, or people who dress as if they were trapped in a “Back to the Future” movie. Her response was quick and expected: “We’d live in a better world.”

I’m not so sure that this is entirely true. Of course acts of terrorism or bad choices of wardrobe are never things we as a society would wish for, however, their presence further ensures that the majority will unite against, or for, whatever outlier comes across our paths. In this way, these social aberrations act as balancing mechanisms that stimulate or discourage our society’s acceptance of certain social movements and future trends.

3) The third (and I think the hardest to accept) proposition about deviance is that “groups will resist any trend toward alienation of a member whose behavior is deviant” (Dentler and Erikson, 1959). I think Dentler and Erikson make an excellent proposition here. When I think of scapegoating with the “mob mentality”, I think of chasing the Frankenstein monster with fire and pitchforks. However, in today’s and even yesterday’s world, an increasingly more formal attitude taken towards deviant members of society has been one of “assisted transformation”. Taken from history for example, may be the missionaries of Great Britain to the Indian colonies. Their goal was to unite in changing the natives’ barbaric ways into more civilized and acceptable beliefs. In today’s world we project this concept every chance we get. Dr. Phil, Oprah, Celebrity Rehab (VH-1 Reality TV Show)…these are all shows, which to some or all extent, premise themselves as being facilitators of change. No doubt Oprah and Dr. Phil help many people, but there is no denying the fact that they, as well as Celebrity Rehab, unite their audiences through the various ways they help take irregular and deviant members of society and lead them through a beautiful metamorphosis into acceptable and upstanding citizens.

Although deviant behavior may never be fully stripped of its negative connotations, perhaps now it becomes easier to see, whether it’s a “good” thing or not, the beneficial aspects it has on our current and future society.