No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

In a recent article we presented an integrated typology in which we categorized deviance based on both norms and evaluations. Cross-classifying normative expectations and societal evaluations identifies four types of deviance. Negative deviance implies negatively evaluated underconformity (or nonconformity); rate busting depicts negatively appraised overconformity; deviance admiration designates positively reacted to underconformity (or nonconformity); and positive deviance signifies positively sanctioned overconformity. To assess the efficacy of this typology in relation to a system of norms, ten middle-class norms-previously defined as the predominant ones in the United States by Tittle and Paternoster (2000)-were evaluated in relation to our integrated typology. Those norms are: loyalty, privacy, prudence, conventionality, responsibility, participation, moderation, honesty, peacefulness, and courtesy. Each potentiality is identified; for example, regarding the norm of loyalty, apostasy is the negative deviance form (negative deviance has already been outlined in relation to all ten norms); rebellion is the deviance admiration type; fanaticism is the rate busting scenario; and altruism is the positive deviance kind.According to Sumner (1994) the study of deviance has been a core and vital area of sociological pursuit since the nascent days; specifically, since the 1895 publication of Durkheim's The Rules of Sociological Method. Nevertheless, by 1975-under assault from critical ideological stances, including the new criminology (Taylor, Walton, and Young 1973)-the field collapsed, or as Sumner (1994, p. ix) so dramatically proclaimed, "The field now resembles the Somme in 1918." From an opposing ideology and in accord with Moynihan (1993), Hendershott (2002) has argued that deviance has been recalibrated and that much considered deviant in the past (e.g., suicide and drug addiction) is no longer so judged. Along with ceding control to medical professions, she views advocacy groups-more than shared values and culture-as shaping current societal

Interviews were conducted with redheads, and labeling theory is used to analyze their stigmatization in society as well as their perceptions of having red hair. First, using the relativistic stance of labeling theory, red hair is described as a type of deviance. Second, the processes involved in the labeling of redheads are examined, especially in regard to how redheads have personally experienced stereotyping. The stereotypes that redheads perceive to be socially constructed are as follows: hot temper, clownish, weirdness, Irishness, not capable of being in the sun, wild women, wimpy men, and intellectual superiority. Finally, the impact of being negatively labeled and treated in society is considered. Redheads typically receive negative treatment as children, and, as a consequence, redheads experience a lowered self‐esteem, feelings of differentness, and a sense of being the center of attention. Nevertheless, redheads typically transform a negative experience into a positive one by learning to appreciate their hair color and how it has shaped their sense of self. In essence, they become an example of tertiary deviants.