Are crime and deviance socially constructed? To answer this, we first need to understand what is meant when using the words crime, deviance and socially constructed. While it can be difficult to find a set definition of crime and deviance it is safe to say that amongst researcher’s crime and deviance can be thought of as behaviour and acts that will usually generate a negative social reaction, these can range from a small breach of social norms to a punishable crime. It is also worth noting that not all deviant acts are criminal but most criminal acts are deviant (Downes, et al., 2016, p. 21). In this case, crime can be defined as an act, omission or behaviour that breaks the criminal law and is subject to punishment by said law (Newburn, 2013, p. 8). Deviance can be defined as a socially unacceptable act or behaviour, that goes against what are considered social norms (Balkan, et al., 1980) but not necessarily illegal or prohibited by law (Treadwell, 2013, p. 10).
Finally, social construction can be defined as a theory that something only exists because society made it so. In criminology, this suggests that crime is decided and created by society, that society make laws that control an individual’s behaviour and that a society has determined what is considered deviant, criminal or lawful (Treadwell, 2013, p. 15).
To determine if crime and deviance are social constructed, it merits looking into their place in the history of societies, starting with crime. Crime is often said to be socially constructed by the society in which the crime is committed, for example, homosexuality, in the UK is legal and has been since 1967 (Parliment UK, n.d.), whereas before that and elsewhere in the world, homosexuality is still considered criminal, for example in countries such as; Sudan, Yemen and Iran, homosexuality is a crime and punishable by death (Fenton, 2016). Even though homosexuality was decriminalised in the UK, it was still considered deviant by some social circles (Crown Prosecution Service, 2008). This shows that crime is socially constructed as a crime is relative to the time at which it was committed and or prosecuted.
Consensus theorists, theorists who believe crime is defined as ideas that all members of society agree on universal values, agree that the variations in laws are linked to the idea of “social morality”, an idea that social groups are held together by common beliefs, such as religion or traditions. Accordingly, the consensus position is that crimes are acts that shock the common conscience or collective morality (Lanier, et al., 2014, p. 10). This shows a strong view that crime is a social construct, as the shared views create common social rules, and this leads society to create laws when the social group agree they are morally wrong and should be punishable. Although the consensus view is strong it is not the only one to believe crime is a social construct. Early functionalist Durkheim (1947) believed that crime, to a certain extent, was inevitable, because not everyone could reach the norms and values of society and would, therefore, rebel (Brown, et al., 2016).
Another example of crime being a social construct is shown when looking at the generally agreed-upon crime of taking a human life. While usually it is agreed that taking a human life is a crime, changing the social context it becomes far more accepted, for instance, killing a person on the street would be a crime, while killing someone at war is acceptable (Lanier, et al., 2014, p. 11).Another example is euthanasia, where it is Illegal in most countries it is accepted in the Netherlands (Government of the Netherlands, n.d.). This society has built its legalities around what the society believes, this illustrates how crime is socially constructed.
Deviance, while not legally condemned or punishable by law, is still socially criticised. It can be difficult to define deviance as in different societies and countries many peoples’ opinions will vary depending on the context of the act (Downes, et al., 2016). An example of deviancy would be smoking, smoking itself is not a criminal act if done by an adult, but it is considered socially unacceptable, dependant on the time and or place it is done, as shown in (Troyer & Gerald, 1985). This study shows how in the 1800’s smoking was condemned due to its connection to other unfavourable behaviours, for example, prostitution or immigration, whereas in post ww1 smoking became favourable, it became a symbol of status and style. Even more recently smoking has been criticised as science made links to deadly illnesses. The evidence this study displays shows us that as society changes and develops, the way they view things, in this case, smoking, does too, this shows us that deviance is socially constructed.
Another deviant act, shouting. Shouting tends to be deviant because it disrupts the social norms. For example, shouting in the street would be doing different to everyone else, going against the collective. Shouting in a home would be deviant because this could disrupt others. Whereas shouting in a private place alone would not be considered deviant. This fits with consensus theory view that crime and deviance are linked to the idea of a common conscience. This helps to understand how deviance is a social construction because there is a common agreement in a society as to what are social norms and what is against them, or deviant.
Furthermore, looking at cyber bullying shows that as society has progressed, acts and behaviours have altered with it, before the invention of the internet cyber bullying a did not exist, and as time changed cyber bullying became an act of deviance, looked down upon by the society, to now being able to be punished and on its way to being a criminal offence (Strickland & Dent, 2017). This shows how crime and deviance can be socially constructed as we see a society asking for people in power to change a social law into criminal one.
After exploring the evidence presented above, we can conclude that crime and deviance are socially constructed. This is evident in evaluating the fact that the definition of crime and deviance change, dependant on the person or society giving the definition and value to the acts. Additionally, that crime and deviance are relative to the time and or place they are “committed”, meaning that how the acts are thought of is relevant to the societies norms.