175DEVIANCYA Visual Model Roaming Between the Functional and Existential2005 Jack Vazzana, PhD7.19.05PREFACE This book was prompted by three problems: 1. Confusion concerning the distinction between deviance and social problems. 2. No consistent theoretical position to explain similar social processes between individual deviancies. 3. Emphasis on deviance continuums “dark” end ignoring more common phenomena. Deviancy is characterized by the relentless emphasis on power struggles between controller and controlled, the accepted and unaccepted, wanting and having, “right” and “wrong”. It is an on-going quest by culture to maintain condoned social behaviour and negatively punish violators, yet the study of deviance is often confused with social problems. The collective interpretation of deviancy, as opposed to a social problem, differs in attitude and process. Deviancy is something to be isolated and extracted; social problems are to be solved. Deviancy has targets; social problems have agendas. Deviancy is an avoidance-action issue whereby people are singled out, labeled and possibly ostracized. A social problem has two or more competing sides that are maneuvering for positive recognition by way of socially approved means, although sub-tactics may veer to the unacceptable. Often deviancy can implement the understanding of a social problem and a social problem can sometimes be impetus for deviancy. Almost always, though, deviancy creates a social problem. In general, the social order focuses on the deviant individual, while a social problem focuses the individual and/or group toward a special interest. Deviancy proceeds directly toward its goal and is characterized by unacceptable social behaviour. Deviancy involves a continuum ranging from mildly acceptable to totally unacceptable and each side in a social problem tends to consider the other as unacceptable. Deviancy; A Visual Model will suggest, by path analysis, that the motive and content of deviant goals may be different, but each goal is reached through a similar process. Deviancy; A Visual Model does not aspire to be historical, but suggests that the aspects of acceptable/unacceptable social behaviour in one era usually do not correspond with another. Deviancy generally has historic roots, yet often texts focus on the present without giving students a pragmatic perspective on the relative influence of the past. More importantly, social value judgments, based on acceptable collective behavior, require varied epistemology. This text will present a deviancy dedicated model based on functional and existential theory. Although these positions tend to have contradictory principles, it is argued that the understanding of deviancy requires an eclectic approach defined by and based on the subjective nature of human experience or “who is doing the defining.” The Model is constructed as a positivistic metaphor of an interpretive epistemology. In this respect, deviancy may be likened to Heraclitus comment concerning change; “You cannot step twice into the same river” (Stumpf 1999). On the other hand, it is after all, still; a river. Jack Vazzana, PhD Brentwood PACONTENTSChapter OneDefinition and Human Background. 7Deviancy Continuum. 11Relative vs Absolute. 18Agendas of History 20Theory Applied 25Chapter TwoStructure and Control 29Hierarchies. 34Dr Jacks Model. 36Situation Conversion. 39Triggers For Action Labeling, Strain and Conflict Theory. 41Agendas and the Model - Differential Association. 45Chapter ThreeControl. 49Social Boundaries. 51Reciprocity. 52Control Relationships. 54Conflicting Theories. 57Expanding Reciprocity. 59Chapter FourStereotypes and Labeling . 64Social Isolation. 67Historical Perspectives 70Anomie. 71Affiliation. 75Labeling. 76Origins of Anomie. 82Chapter FiveNormiant States. 85Diversion. 87Testing the Model 91Stories to Tell. 9