Labeling theory is an interesting concept to
understand. It is constantly present in our lives and is always influencing us.
When it comes to why we label people in our day to day life it is so we can
categorize them to make life easier. It is something that we are conditioned to
do in today’s fast pace society. The idea is that if I see someone or
something, I will automatically use my past experiences in life to categorize
them. For example, if I see a pot on the stove with the heat on, I will
instantly assume that it is hot. My past experiences of touching a pot on the
stove or being told as a young kid that the pot is hot has shape my
understanding of the situation. The same goes for people, if I see a man
wearing a suit and tie, carrying a briefcase while talking on his cell phone as
he walks down the street in downtown Minneapolis , I assume that that man
has a corporate job and either works in the city or has business in the
city. He probably has a
nice car, house and is married. Although for the most part our brains
categorizing and labeling in life helps us to make things simpler it can also
cause us to make wrong assumptions about people and situations. Labeling can
also be caused by what we are told.
I believe that this idea of labeling people and categorizing them
has an impact on who we perceive to be deviant and who we don’t. When we see
news headlines about criminal cases, the way the article is written shapes our
opinion on whether the person in guilty or innocent. If it is written in
favor of the defendant, we will most likely have the assumption that they are
innocent and vise versa. This initial view on the topic will have a huge impact
on how we perceive the topic from then on out. A personal example of this in my
life was the idea of steroids in sports. I grew up in a house hold that viewed
the use of performance enhancing drugs as completely wrong and unacceptable. I
always had this idea in my mind that if you used steroids you were a cheater
and didn't deserve to win (you were deviant). In recent years I have seen the
movie Biggest Stronger Faster which is focused around the idea
that even thought the U.S. says that it doesn't support steroids it
is really everything that the country stands for which is a hard thing to
grasp.
The other headline news story that has a raised in the past few
years that I followed very closely was the Lance Armstrong investigation. I
grew up watching the Tour De France and have been a fan of Lance my whole life.
When he was under investigation for using performance enhancing drugs during
his 7 Tour De France victories and eventually admitted to using such substances
I was torn. I new that using performance enhancing drugs was wrong and against
the rules but I also knew that at that time everyone in the spot was cheating
(using performance enhancing drugs) so it was an even playing field. So would
the actions of Lance Armstrong be considered deviant? It was the norm at the
time and he didn't do anything that others weren't doing so should he be
considered deviant? I have been torn on this issue for a while and have come up
with a personal conclusion. Although Lance was on a level playing field with
other cyclists of that era he was still breaking the rules and therefore is
somewhat deviant. For me this was a hard conclusion to come to because I had
always had always labeled Lance Armstrong as someone who was good. I had the
idea that Lance never broke the rules and worked hard from the bottom up to
earn his success but I was wrong and I had to re-label him.
The way that we as individuals and our society as a whole label
different people as deviant has a lot to do with our past. What has happened to
us in the past impacts our perspective and outlook on day to day life. No two
people have had all of the same experiences and come out the same way. These
experiences give us all different outlooks on the world and the people around
us.
Re: "It is a natural part of our brain that we have little control over. The idea is that if I see someone or something, I will automatically use my past experiences in life to categorize them." Be careful with the use of the term 'natural' in a sociology class. It suggests biological essentialism yet saying that reliance on past experiences prompts the action suggests socialization and our social experiences as the underlying factor.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a fairly strong post that with greater organization - and not ending so abruptly - could be outstanding.
Also, be sure to proof your work; e.g., new vs. knew.
Wow, you used great examples in this blog. I think this was a very in depth response.
ReplyDelete