Introduction
Deviation and criminality are among the multi-faceted phenomena involved in the regulation of the standards followed by the members of society, as its functioning depends on the fundamental patterns and sociocultural norms governing its operations. Deviance is a kind of actions, thoughts, or ways of life that move beyond sociologically set norms or understandings. Thus, crime is what crime is not precisely about but involves activities that are deemed criminal in a particular jurisdiction. People’s deviance can be based on variables such as culture, time, and space; however, criminality is based on a set of rules that the court has to punish formally. The two notions are intricately related but inexplicitly different, having dictated individuals’ judgments, behaviors and the whole legal organizations as well. Capturing the essence of their uniqueness can be vital for a more general notion of how human characteristics are connected with the highly intricate way in which society reacts.
Definitions of Deviance and Criminality
In formal meaning, deviance brings to light the social events that does not fall within the scope of social norms or general expectations. It refers to vices or features that are deviations or taboos from the norms that can be found in a specific society. While observing we find that every individual has its viewpoints, morals, and social norms. Hence, crime according to the law of the land may be different compared to the crimes related to morals and norms of a particular group in society. Although deviance and subculture commonly associate with the idea of drifting from the social norms, deviance is more general and includes the entire spectrum of behavior – from inconventionally socially accepted bit mildly uncivil to plainly criminal (Curra, 2016a).
The situation in which the imprudent choices are made prevails will exert a lasting influence on the traits and the features of deviance. Infractions that may be considered criminal acts in one. country or cultural background may, on the other hand, be perfectly acceptable somewhere else. Cultural factors like values, historical similarities and positions, have consequences for the interpretation of what is deviant and what is not. Conversely, the behavior that undercuts established tradition in the conservative worldview might be publicly acceptable or even worshipped in the more neutral society. The notable example in this scenario is the marriage equality known as same-sex marriage, that was for long time lawfully indifferent, but in many countries can nowadays be recognized and acknowledged. This serves as the proof that societal norms and values which society deem as normal today were once regarded as abnormal (Curra, 2016b).
Predictors of Crime and Deviance
Age, sex or gender, and economic status act consistently as leading factors in the forecasting of crime and deviant behavior that is within the society as a whole. Age primarily impacts this, as there is quite a considerable difference in behavioral patterns among different life stages. Without a doubt, young people of this age are risk-prone individuals because of psychological factors, which include “peer influence, experimentation, and still incipient self-control,” leading to antisocial behaviors (Curra, 2016b). On the other hand, the fact that sex or gender is a potent force on the performance of charities because people tend to explore their habits based on gender norms or expectations. The gendered expectations can result in varying proportions of women and men involved in the crime or different degrees of conscience in the deviant behavior. Economic status, for one, is a crucial determinant of both the criminal and the type of delinquent behaviors exhibited. The opportunities for achieving economic success are not equally distributed in society. Therefore, certain areas are conducive to criminal activities, such as those who are facing financial strain and may have to resort to illegal ways in order to meet their basic needs or satisfy their desires. Economic disparity might cause a person to feel as if they are in another world or they do not have any rights, which increases their chances of deviance because they may use it as a defense mechanism against injustice or perseverance (Curra, 2016b). These determinants are nested, and they hence have different cooperations and conflicts to mediate the intricate web in which crime and delinquency exist in society.
Evolution of Definitions Over Time
The changing meanings of crime and deviancy signify that the understandings of society’s social norms and values are not static but fluid. Contemporary conceptions of deviance and crime has been changing to adhere to shifting cultural perspective and interpretation of humans actions. Nowadays, people are likely to see the many types of diversity existent in their society and accept behaviors that weren’t acceptable before (Curra, 2016a). This context will lead to a more complex definition of deviance. Secondly, the progress in the disciplines like psychology and sociology as emphasized the interplay of social, psychological driven factors which contribute to a substantial difference in the understanding of crime and the definitions of the criminal law (Curra, 2016c). In contrast to the definitions from 25 years ago, they may be on the ‘stiff side’, and exhibit a rigid and conservative attitude towards the same social and moral standards, which occurred in that period. There might have been a concentration on the manifestations of misbehavior or criminality from the outside in, with a significant less emphasis given to the background causes or contextual factors. Moreover, public attitudes toward certain actions were most probably harsher back then, which led in the establishment of rules that constructed broader norms on what deviance and criminality involved.
On the other hand, even terms from 50 years ago may demonstrate a far most divergent evolution compared to contemporary understanding of society and culture, considering the significant change the social norms and values undergo over time. During this period, stereotypical moral panic incidents may have occurred, especially with regard to relationship to specific behaviors, thus imposing more severe classification of these behaviors as deviant and stricter norms together with harsher penalties (Curra, 2016a). In addition to this, it is possible that progress made in other areas like criminal science and psychology weren’t as much incorporated into plain people’s concepts of crime and deviant and consequently even more simplified or deterministic ideas emerged. Thus, the evolvements in definitions through ages not only constitute espousals in social conventions and conventionalities, as well as in scientific expertise of humanity nature.
Society’s Acceptance of Criminalization
The acceptance of the community by sough to crime has a multi-fold approach; of course, in reality, this indicates the complexity of community norms and power relations. One central aspect that contributes to how society views the criminalization of certain behaviors is the upholding of cultural heritage and personal values. Behaviors viewed as producing sociocultural anarchy or moral disintegration are more likely to be classified as criminal behaviors. Moreover, political agendas and special interests can be forms of advantage that are used in forming law decisions. As a result, unlawful behaviors and actions that affirm specific political ideas and interests of an entity can be directly punished (Curra, 2016c). Besides the unequal way in which perception is applied, it is part of the dynamics that make the application of criminalizing behaviors and the way they are enforced. The judicial system, in many cases, is so unjust to marginalized communities since they receive police action and harsher sentences for similar offenses compared to more privileged people, highlighting the inequality in criminal justice.
In another way, the influence of wealth and status also powerfully shows itself, as such people may go unpunished for their crimes or even receive favorable treatment from law enforcement and the justice system. Economic resources buy all the legal counsel and diversion opportunities and leave no chance to plead down the criminal charges. Hence, justice is said not to be blind but rather always inclined in the form of the rich ones. This, therefore, reveals how the virtue of acceptance of criminalization is based on the entrenchment of power dynamics and systemic inequation. Consequently, the seeds of injustices must be sowed within the criminal justice system (Curra, 2016c).
Examples of Deviant Behavior and Crime
The cybercrime problem is very serious in modern society, and it can be committed in the cyber environment in various ways such as hacking, phishing, identity theft, and false manipulation with online data. Interestingly enough, substance abuse, the case where one may choose to either abuse drugs or to be hooked on alcohol in excess of the social standards, is a behavior same with addiction that has also been commonly observed. In the end, national authorities established specialized units, alongside legislation and a vast set of technological equipment, to tackle cybercrime. They started working together with other organizations, government agencies, and Information Technology companies to handle investigations and arrests involving transactions larger than national borders (Curra, 2016). Instead of relying solely on preventive measures, they also delve into education of the masses by creating awareness about cyber threats and procedures of safe cyber activities through educational programs, publications, and outreach materials.
Regardless, 25 years ago, law enforcement agencies were on the cusp of putting down cybercrime investigation policies with limited insights on how cybercrimes can be investigated and handbooks to combat cybercrimes. The Internet as still a more mysterious then now, law enforcement agencies needed to get more power to fight cybertimes like we do now. Following a similar pattern, the strategies behind the offending of illicit drugs had a great effect on the field of public policies, which started to be more severe, specifying arrest and imprisonment at the midpoint of policies instead of treatment and rehabilitation. With the growth of information technologies in society and the difference of the views on the nature of crime and mental deviation, such a shift to comprehensive approaches in policing was the natural step that gained more validity in the preceding years (Curra, 2016c).
Conclusion
Lastly, context is a critical factor that affects delinquency and criminality concepts, which can be looked at as a variable based on social, cultural, and historical dimensions. Social norms are contingent on societal evolution. As societies move forward, deviant behaviors and criminal offenses are subject to change in meaning and perception. Keeping the secrets of these concepts straight is a must to know how politicians make laws, set strategies for law enforcement agencies, and what social support campaigns are. In addition to the above, the criminal justice system must tackle separating bad apples from credible ones, hence reducing biases to ensure equitable treatment and outcomes for all citizens. Through the constant review and modification of our different outlets of deviance and wrongdoing, we hope to eventually have a community that is fair and open to all.
References
Curra, J. O. (2016a). The relativity of deviance (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 1, The Dynamic Nature of Deviance (pp. 1–39).
Curra, J. O. (2016b). The relativity of deviance (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 2, Being Deviant (pp. 40–77).
Curra, J. O. (2016c). The relativity of deviance (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Chapter 3, Power, Social Networks, and Organizational Deviance (pp. 78–95 and 108–111).
write