1. Summary
Deviance is a violation of cultural norms (socially expected
human behavior). There are two categories of deviance: the first is a formal
offense that violates official law, and the second is an unofficial offense.
Deviances are relatively relative to cultural differences. Deviation is not
necessarily done by bad people. White hip-hop activities such as ‘Limp Bizkit’
and ‘Eminem’ are examples of deviations that give up their socio-economic status
and pursue profits.
There are many theories of deviance. Psychology and neurology
explain that differences in brain structure cause deviations. Biology says that
as humans pursue group cohesion, they have evolved into humans following norms.
Robert K. Melton's social-strain divides deviations into five types. From a Structural-Functionalism
perspective, explain that deviance seems to be dysfunctional, but has the
potential to show the boundaries of society that people should not go beyond.
In Labeling Theory, people are forced to impose specific identities, and people
argue that they deviate because they choose their identity. Society uses
'social control' to return members who have committed these deviations. Social
control is likewise divided into formal social control and non-formal social
control. Official social controls include societal-defined prisons and mental
health institutions. Non-official social control is exemplified by the Choson’s
‘멍석말이’(Beating
someone in violation of cultural norms), or the education of parents.
Current studies of deviant behavior include violent video games of childhood,
tattoos, and sexual violence at universities.
2. Interesting Point
I was more interested in explaining deviations from the
structural functionalist explanation. Merton, a scholar of structural and
functionalism, explains crime and says that although crime has an explicit
function that externally affects society, there is a potential function that
limits the boundaries of the law that should not be passed on to the members of
society. I think this explanation is interesting, but I think that the
explanation that all crimes have these potential functions is not right. I think
that this kind of explanation is to see all negative phenomena existing in
society just from the ‘status quo’ of the phenomenon.
3. Discussion point
I never agree with the assumption that gamers playing violent games
will deviate. It is the same whether it is a child or an adult. According to a
study by Hannover University, violent games such as "GTA" or
"Call of Duty" were divided into gamer and non-gamer groups, but
there was no difference in aggression and nervous response between the two
groups. In addition, studies by Lawrence Kurtner and Cheryl Olson of Harvard
University School of Medicine showed no difference in response from children
who did violent games and children who did nonviolent games. They argue that
playing violent games is nothing less than stressing the vast majority of
children. In addition, there is also a graph by Dr. Lawrence Katz that the
crime rate has declined since the launch of a rather violent game. What do you
think? Do you think a really violent game leads people to crime?
Comments
Post a Comment