Deviance--a construct of society

It's largely our human nature to be picky about things that don't seem to go with the flow. We jibe about those HDB ah sohs (or lao hiaos) that don't get their hair colours right (well at least on many occassions)--for Heaven's sake, bright green crest atop ginger tresses! We try hard to contain those chuckles when we see a scrawny guy putting his bony arm around (without much success I guess...) his dinosaur-of-a-girlfriend, re-enacting a "Jack and Rose aboard the Titanic" scene--no offence to those couples out there, just simply drawing an example.

Who defines the "flow" of society, the "oughts" and the "shoulds"? The hard truth is, if you are not part of the majority, you are often seen as a sore thumb that sticks out or that stain in the fabric of society. What happens to the minority who become sacrificial lambs in the affirmation of a dominant culture where associated beliefs and attitudes are identified as more salutary than others? They "become" deviant. Emile Durkheim, one of the earliest sociologists, believed that it was impossible for any society to be free from deviance--even a "society of saints" will have its sinners. Since, sociologists have regarded defining deviance as a fundamental activity of any society.

I'm not going to put my foot down and say whether I'm for or against this because in some way this process of defining deviance does serve as a regulative force in society by setting limits on individual actions, but at the same time it could perpetuate stigma against minority groups like the mentally ill, juvenile delinquents, and ex-convicts. What I am going to argue is that deviance has everything to do with the response of others and nothing to do with any defect in the individual displaying those behaviours considered as deviant. Furthermore, labelling can thrust that person into behaving in a manner consistent with the tag (i.e. spiral into a self-fulfilling prophesy).

In Singapore where many of us are perfectionistic and "face"-conscious, it is difficult to run away from this activity of defining deviance. Since young we've been socialised by our parents to think that road sweepers never worked hard in school that's why they end up sweeping our roads. Those at the bottom of the social ladder become marginalised and suppressed so that those at the top feel better about themselves. No need for embarrassment, it's simply the social psychological process of social comparison. However, when comparison evolves into contempt for others and unhealthy expectations of oneself, we need to keep our instincts in check and rise above them.

That brings me back to the thoughts in my mind that stirred this little discussion. Someone may be happy with his own life. He may not see it as any problem at all. It's not that he is committing any offence or whatsoever, but others just don't seem to feel comfortable around this person. They see him as having a problem, but he thinks otherwise. As a single entity, he does fine. However, in a community, he is perceived as problematic and is marginalised. So how do you resolve this? Should the person relent to social pressures and leave the community? No matter where he goes, he may face the same reaction. Or should we give him a label that he's "abnormal" and impose the world's expectations on him? But he doesn't deem himself as crazy, just different. Hmm...the complexities of life.