Basic theory
The reasons for this phenomenon lie in conflicts between people. Stigma theory states that the majority defines norms, and assigns a label (stigma) to violators of these norms. People who do not comply with generally accepted rules of behavior are considered deviants (deviants).
Stigma theory emerged from the work of several world-renowned sociologists: Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker, and Kai Erikson. They all belonged to the same generation of scientists who worked in the first half of the 20th century. Erving Goffman also made a major contribution to the development of the theory. A key feature of this teaching is the idea that there are no inherently negative actions. Internal content does not affect the rating in any way. A negative attitude depends only on those norms that society itself freely accepts.
HOW TO OVERCOME STIGMATIZATION IN SOCIETY?
There is objective evidence that stigma and fear associated with infectious diseases hinder effective disease control. On the other hand, building trust in reliable medical care and advice, showing empathy for those affected by the disease, understanding the characteristics of the disease itself, and taking effective practical measures to help people and their loved ones stay safe have positive effects. To mobilize society to decisively fight the disease and prevent increased fears and stigma, it is essential to disseminate information about COVID-19. It is necessary to create an environment that allows open, honest and constructive discussion of the disease and its consequences. Below are some recommendations on how to avoid worsening and ultimately overcome the problem of social stigma:
1. Words matter: how you can and cannot discuss the new coronavirus infection COVID-19 2. Everyone’s personal contribution: simple tips to help overcome stigma 3. Tips and talking points for communication activities
Primary deviation
In sociology, the accepted point of view is that there are no “normal” and “abnormal” people. Moreover, every person is characterized by deviant behavior in some specific area. Therefore, there are no people with pathologies. Some people break traffic rules, some don’t pay extra taxes, some people act out during football matches.
The theory of stigmatization identifies the so-called primary deviation. These are those violations of social norms that escape the attention of law enforcement officers due to their frivolity and routine. Moreover, the assessment of “good” or “bad” action depends on many little things. For example, in some societies women are not allowed to do things that men can do, while in other countries there are no such restrictions. Also, deviant behavior is often defined according to mass stereotypes. For example, in many countries men are criticized for their effeminate appearance and image, although in some countries such behavior is not prohibited. The criterion of “good” and “bad” is associated with a person’s social environment. It depends only on the morals of the people living nearby whether criticism will follow for this or that behavior.
Goffman's stigma theory
The theory of stigmatization is very close in its basic provisions to the theory of labels. “Stigma” means mark in Latin. Labeling can be seen as analogous to the practice of branding criminals that was common in the past.
This form of crime control often initiated new, more serious crimes as a reaction to social rejection. Erving Goffman made a significant contribution to understanding how people labeled as deviant cope with their deviance.
In his research work, Goffman adhered to the tradition of symbolic interactionism. He was particularly interested in the way people interact with each other and the messages they send through words and gestures. In one of his studies, he examined people who have certain characteristics that cause others to find them unusual, unpleasant, or deviant (Goffman, 1963). Goffman called these characteristics stigmas, and he was particularly interested in how people with stigmas cope with them.
Goffman's analysis begins with people with physical disabilities and gradually introduces a wide range of other disabilities. As a result, Goffman shows that the presence of stigma is not something unusual, characteristic of a small circle of physical and moral cripples, but is quite common among “ordinary citizens.” He states that “...the most fortunate of the normal are most likely to have their half-hidden faults, and for every little fault there is a social circumstance by which it may become a great fault” (1963).
Goffman deals with two main types of stigmatized individuals. The first type, an individual with a manifest stigma, suggesting that his difference is already known and easily proven. The second is an individual with latent stigma, which suggests that his disability is unknown to anyone (Goffman, 1963). Manifest and latent stigmas can take the form of physical defects, such as when a person loses a body part; circumstances may influence the individual, such as when a person has served time in prison or has had a mental illness; or if he is a member of an ethnic or racial group that is often viewed negatively by others, such as the Roma.
From Goffman's point of view, people with manifest deficiencies inevitably encounter difficulties in interacting with the people around them. Having a stigma visible to everyone, a person prepares in advance for negative reactions from other members of society. At the same time, people with latent stigmas try to hide their inherent shortcomings, building interactions so that others do not find out anything.
Concealment often becomes burdensome. An example is the case described in the literature of Mrs. G., whose husband was admitted to a psychiatric hospital. In order to hide from her neighbors what was a stigma for her, she told them that her husband was in the hospital due to suspected cancer. Every day she hurried to get the mail before the neighbors had time to take it with them. She refused second breakfasts at the pharmacy with women from neighboring apartments to avoid their questions. Before inviting them over, she hid all sorts of materials related to the hospital, etc. (Iarou, Clausen, Robinet, 1955).
To be continued…
Secondary deviation
The labeling of a person by the majority entails noticeable consequences for him. In response to the reaction of society, secondary deviant behavior arises. A person who has received a label becomes for those around him a drug addict, a criminal, a slacker, etc. This status suppresses any other individual personality traits. People who have lived for a long time as stigmatized begin to build their entire lives on the basis of this characteristic.
Stigma theory also explains the typical behavior of those who find themselves in a deviant group. Feeling the criticism of the rest of society every day is a huge stress. Friends, acquaintances and even relatives often turn away from people with a negative label. Such a critical situation tests all the social skills of an individual. What can a person do in such a situation? As a rule, he joins a deviant group with the same people.
Question 34. Stigmatization theory: general provisions and variations.
The cause of deviance and crime is stigmatization (the concepts of “dramatization of evil” by F. Tannenbaum, “social identity” by I. Hoffman, “secondary deviation” by E. Lemert, “deviant career and labeling” by G. Becker). The main thesis of this group of concepts when explaining the causes of crime comes down to the following statement: crime is the result of a social assessment of behavior and the declaration of certain types of behavior as criminal. All people do right and wrong (in some way) things. But some of them become objects of social control and response, while others do not. Those who come under the radar of social control are given the stigma (stamp, label) “criminal.” Thus, social control gives rise to stigmatization, and it, in turn, already leads to the formation of stable criminal or deviant behavior in stigmatized individuals, which in its totality forms the entire “corpus” of crime or deviance. This thesis formed the basis of the theories of social constructivism/constructionism (Berger, Luhmann).
The theory of stigmatization is based on the concept of symbolic interactionism of the social psychologist Mad (1863-1931). From it in the 1970-1980s. The theory of stigmatization (Labeling - Approach) grew, in which great importance is attached to the reaction to an act, and a person is understood rather as a being defined primarily from the outside, as a socially passive social object. Lemert introduced differences between primary and secondary deviance. Primary deviant behavior has many causes. A secondary deviant is a person whose life and identity are determined by the reality of deviance. If deviant behavior is assessed as a normal change (variant) of everyday behavior, then the person will continue to be viewed as a being who fits into society. If a person’s behavior is devalued, then this will be perceived by him as an attack on his identity and originality. In this process, the person will become stigmatized, alienated from society, and finally excluded from it.
Based on these ideas, G. Becker developed a theory of deviant career: a person is not born a deviant, but becomes one, slowly being drawn (slipping) into a criminal lifestyle.
The formation of a criminal career goes through several stages or stages:
1) absence or weakening of psychological contact with loved ones;
2) acquaintance with a deviant subculture, which offers him motivation for action, creates identification patterns, helps to interpret the situation, provides means of protection from internal and external control, etc.,
3) testing the options for action proposed by the subculture and receiving the stigma of a deviant;
4) acceptance of stigma, restructuring of the value world, acceptance of the social role prescribed by stigma.
The parameters of deviant career studied in the long term include; the prevalence of deviant persons in a person’s environment; cases of deviations; early onset of deviant manifestations (as predictors of the development of a deviant career); cases of career interruption due to various predictors (family, relationships in the workforce, change of personal concept, etc.); specialization (tendency to repeat deviance); escalation (the tendency to commit deviations, all of which have serious consequences).
The theory of stigmatization continues to actively develop. So, in the 1990s. A theory has emerged that can be called “stigmatization in development” (developmentalinnature). Here the emphasis is on the process of stigmatization itself and its impact on a deviant career. The creators of the concept wondered whether and how stigma would influence identity, what mediating functions stigmatization performs in the process of interaction. Another modification of stigma theory is “structural stigma.” We are talking, first of all, about stigma in public opinion, which, through a rejecting or supportive reaction from the environment, as well as limited opportunities, can play a certain role in conformally overcoming life’s difficulties. From the socio-psychological process theory emerges a radical social-structural point of view, according to which it is necessary to connect interactionism and the theory of conflict of powers, since deviation is the result of social determination, which itself is determined in a capitalist society by power relations. Controlling institutions (for example, the police, the court) define deviance and crime based on considerations of maintaining the power of the ruling class, and in connection with this they often stigmatize the actions of representatives of the lower strata.
Australian criminologist D. Braithwaite added the category of shame to interactionist theory as an important means for exercising informal social control, thereby formulating the theory of shame and reunion. At the same time, he makes a distinction between shame, which includes a person in society, and shame, which excludes him. The exclusionary reaction of society is carried out through various forms of stigmatization and pressure that force a person to degradation. With “returning” shame, the exclusionary reaction, although it leads to the condemnation of deviance, also leads to the normalization of the deviant’s life and the preservation of his ties with the community.
Life Cycle Theories (LifeCourseTheories): deviance and deviant behavior develop as an interactive process (process of interaction), which is embedded in general life cycles and proceeds along with them. The theory is aimed at finding answers to the questions: why do people begin to act deviantly in the first place? Why do they continue to act like this? Why are their misdeeds becoming more frequent and severe? and why, finally, do they stop committing deviance? Personal or social factors lead to deviance, which in turn causes personal and social harm to the deviants themselves. To explain deviance, as well as changes in its quality, many factors are used, and important points of change in a deviant career are also taken into account.
Disadvantages of stigma theory:
· It does not show what initial factors caused deviant behavior
. In many forms of deviance, it is the living conditions that are responsible for labeling such people.
· Reveals important social issues but provides only a partial explanation for deviant behavior
.
· It is not correct to explain it only by stigmatization. According to the logic of the theory, if stigmatization is abolished, then crime will also disappear. However, a nickname does not stick to a person just like that. First the deed, then the word.
Stigma and crime
The principle of unity works very clearly in the criminal world. People who find themselves in this environment almost always become members of a huge group that opposes themselves to the rest of society.
Based on this pattern, some researchers believe that the increase in crime is partly due to the fact that society stigmatizes criminals, rejects them into the criminal niche, and thereby prevents those in prison from returning to normal life. The theory of stigmatization in criminology today has many supporters. Interestingly, a similar rule leads to the emergence of youth subcultures and countercultures.
Stigma in psychiatry
Stigma in psychiatry is defined as a sign of contempt and mistrust that separates an individual from others. It always leads to negative worries and, above all, provokes a feeling of shame. Mental illnesses are still perceived as indulgence in one’s own whims and desires, as weakness. Stigmatization of patients often extends to their descendants, causing emotional trauma not only to adults, but also to their children, as well as other members of the patient’s family.
The World Psychiatric Association has recognized that a psychiatric diagnosis constitutes a stigma that impedes social adjustment and the enjoyment of legal rights.
According to information from the World Health Organization, refusal to provide individuals with a history of mental illness with socio-cultural, economic, civil and political rights, and violation of basic freedoms are characteristic of most countries in the world. Such violations are observed not only exclusively within medical institutions, but also beyond their borders. Persons with mental disabilities are subject to stigmatization, abuse and neglect. In addition, individuals who are mentally healthy may also be subject to discrimination when they are mistakenly identified as having or having had a mental illness in the past.
Social stigma is always characterized by emotional overtones and is often completely unjustified by reality, which is the key difference between social stigmas and invented stereotypes. An illustrative example of stigmatization is the majority opinion that alcoholics are much less dangerous than schizophrenics and homosexuals.
Stigmatization of people with mental disorders and subsequent discrimination are the most serious health problems.
We are on Telegram! Subscribe and be the first to know about new publications!
Life with a shortcut
Group activities among stigmatized people can take many forms. But in all of them there is a common, similar unifying stimulus - the desire to find fellow sufferers. These can be well-organized and even supported by the state and social services clubs for the disabled, the elderly, people suffering from obesity, etc.
Some of these circles may develop into something more. For example, many countries have their own nationwide societies of alcoholics anonymous. They don't just bring together people trying to overcome their bad habits. Such societies offer their members a whole doctrine - a new way of life necessary in order to return their lives to normal.
Stigmatization in sociology can also occur along national lines. In this case, people often unite based on the principle of neighborhood. In large cities, small national districts are appearing, the majority of the population of which is part of one or another diaspora.
DESIRED and UNDESIRABLE WORDS AND EXPRESSIONS
Below are some tips on what words and language are welcome and what are not when discussing the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). PREFERABLE: Call the disease a new coronavirus infection (COVID-19). It is undesirable to use references to the geographical or ethnic origin of the disease, calling it the “Wuhan”, “Chinese” or “Asian” virus. The official name of the disease was specifically chosen to avoid stigmatization: “co” means “corona”, “vi” means virus, and “d” means disease (disease), the number 19 indicates the year the disease appeared - 2021. PREFERABLE: name the sick people “people with COVID-19,” who are “being treated for COVID-19,” “recovering from COVID-19,” or “died after contracting COVID-19.”
It is undesirable to call sick people “COVID-19 patients” or “coronavirus victims.”
PREFERRED: People with “possible” or “suspected” COVID-19. Undesirable: “suspicious” or “suspected” patients for COVID-19. PREVIOUS: talk about “contamination” or “infection” with COVID-19.
It is not advisable to say that people are “spreading COVID-19,” “infecting others,” or “spreading the virus,” because this implies that they are guilty of deliberately transmitting the infection.
The use of terms that characterize the behavior of the sick as criminal or dehumanize them creates the impression that they have done something bad or are second-class citizens compared to others; this creates stigma, reduces compassion for such people and possibly discourages them from seeking help, screening, diagnosis and quarantine. PREFERABLE: speak with caution about the risks associated with COVID-19, rely on scientific data and current medical recommendations from official bodies. 2 UNAIDS terminology guide: not “victims of AIDS”, but “people living with HIV”; not “fighting AIDS”, but “responding to the problem of AIDS”. Disadvantages : picking up and spreading unconfirmed rumors and using hyperbolic fear-inducing words and expressions such as “plague”, “end of the world”, etc. DESIRED: maintain a positive tone and focus on the effectiveness of prevention and treatment. Most people are able to cope with the disease. There are simple rules by following which we can all protect ourselves, our loved ones and people vulnerable to infection. It is not advisable to: focus on the negative side or talk about threats. We must all strive to keep those most at risk from infection safe. DESIRED: pay attention to the effectiveness of protective measures to help prevent infection with the new coronavirus, as well as the importance of timely screening, diagnosis and treatment.
"Understanding"
Often social stigmatization leads to the fact that a person’s imposed identity may not coincide with his true identity. This discrepancy leaves a negative imprint on the individual. Such an antisocial person can only expect support from two groups of people. The first is those who have to live with the same stigma. They were discussed above.
But there is also a second group. These are the so-called “understandings”. Such people are considered “normal”, society treats them as one of their own. However, they do not want to label them as “lepers.” On the contrary, those who “understand” treat stigma carriers with sympathy. With them, a person suffering from his deficiency can feel comfortable. “Those who understand” do not shame or force those rejected by the rest of society to control themselves.
Connection with discrimination[edit | edit code]
Stigmatization can lead to discrimination, that is, to real actions that limit the rights of a group. Although in civilized countries [ which ones?
] Overt stigmatization and associated discrimination are either prohibited by law or culturally condemned; virtually every society is saturated with stigmas. So, for example, people who came to Moscow from the outback received the labels “provincials,” “limiters,” or “bagmen” (a term common in Soviet times), while those who did not arrive received the labels “zaMKAdyshi.” They are considered to be less cultured than native Muscovites, which can be considered a stigmatization leading to discrimination.
Contacts with deviants
The phenomenon of "understanders" particularly interested Erving Goffman. He described this type of human attitude in detail in his book “Stigma”. According to his assumption, in order to become close to the marginalized, an ordinary person needs to experience a serious shock - something that would allow him to look at others in an unfamiliar way.
People who are stigmatized have difficulty making contact with people from outside their circle. For example, a “bad” child, expelled from the company of his peers, will most likely snap at attempts to establish any kind of relationship with him. This is a natural psychological defense against a mostly hostile environment. Every antisocial person loses his sociability over time. Gradually it becomes more and more difficult for him to find a common language with people. Therefore, even a friendly individual will have to wait for some time and try to show his sincerity. And only after this will he be able to gain the trust of the stigmatized.
Differential association theory
University of Illinois professor Edwin Sutherland (1883–1950) contributed to the development of stigma theory, but his most significant contribution to the development of science is the creation of an original criminological concept. His concept, called the theory of differential association, was largely based on the ideas of G. Tarde about imitation as the basis of human communication.
In 1939, in a voluminous monograph “Principles of Criminology,” E. Sutherland formulated his idea in the form of a detailed concept, including several points. The essence of E. Sutherland's theory was as follows:
- criminal behavior is no fundamentally different from other forms of human activity, a person becomes a criminal only due to his ability to learn;
- criminal learning involves the perception of criminogenic attitudes, habits and skills. It is these negative personality qualities, which are formed as a result of negative social influences, imitation of a bad example, and only they, that underlie criminal behavior;
- a person learns criminal behavior not because he has special criminal inclinations for this, but because criminal examples more often come to his attention, and he establishes a closer connection with such people from whom he can adopt criminogenic views and skills. If the same teenager had been included in a different social circle since childhood, he would have grown up to be a completely different person (the point that, in fact, gave his theory its name).
Differentiated, various social connections determine the direction of a child’s upbringing: if he moves in a respectable society, he learns the standards of law-abiding behavior. If he maintains contact with criminal elements, then he learns the corresponding standards of thinking and actions.
E. Sutherland introduced two psychological elements into his theory. The first is that criminal views, orientations and skills are acquired in a group through personal informal communication. The formal approach of educators at school, as well as parents who do not have psychological contact with their children, often misses the mark, and the educational efforts of these persons often have zero effect. The real educator of such a teenager is the participants in informal communication in a group of delinquents. In most cases, offenders do not even think about educating anyone, but their authority turns out to be a decisive factor in imitation.
The essence of the second element lies in a theoretical position very similar to I. Bentham’s postulate: a person becomes a criminal as a result of the predominance of his views favorable to breaking the law over views that are not favorable to it.
E. Sutherland’s student, Professor Donald Cressy, did a lot for the development and practical adaptation of this theory. The concept of differentiated communication was subjected to very sharp criticism by behaviorists. However, their criticism was constructive, and the organic combination of E. Sutherland’s theory with the provisions of behaviorists, on the one hand, made it more scientifically grounded and practical, on the other, marked the beginning of the integration of disparate concepts that claim to discover radical ways to rid humanity of social evil, in a unified and comprehensive theory.
Behaviorists R. Burgess and R. Akers supplemented E. Sutherland's theory with the concept of operant behavior. Based on the explanation of behavior according to the “stimulus-response” scheme, these scientists modified the main provisions of E. Sutherland as follows: criminal behavior is learned because these forms of behavior lead the teenager and those from whom he learns to results that are useful and pleasant for them. Learning to engage in criminal behavior occurs when it is more strongly reinforced than non-criminal behavior.
The scientific significance of E. Sutherland's theory lay in the fact that he tried to explain criminal behavior on the basis of an analysis of people's views, life orientations, assessments, skills and habits. This approach gave a powerful impetus to criminological research in this direction, and a whole series of theories appeared (theories of control, stability, social connections, drift, reference group, divergent sentences), which based the explanation of the causes of crime and the development of prevention measures on the phenomenon of learning. The process of training by professional criminals to their assistants from among young offenders was analyzed in detail. Some scholars began to view the prison as a school of crime. Certain recommendations have been made to divide prisoners into groups and keep them separate in order to prevent the exchange of criminal experiences.
Thomas Scheff's ideas
The idea of stigmatization was one of the main ones in the scientific work of Thomas Scheff. His main thesis is that society establishes social control over its members, the main instruments of which are sanctions against those who deviate from the generally accepted norm. Sheff continued the research of his predecessors. He was noticeably influenced by Becker's theory of stigmatization.
At the same time, Sheff studied the phenomenon of labeling from his own perspective. Before that, he did a lot of research on the problem of mental illness and its transition into the interpersonal space. In essence, Sheff connected psychology and sociology.
Classification of stigma
Types of social stigmatization can be classified as follows:
- Cultural stigmatization - social labels rooted in the culture of the state or world culture (“Chukchi are slow-witted”);
- Institutional (legislative) stigmatization - legally enshrined stigmatization (“a person with a criminal record”, “full legal capacity occurs upon reaching the age of eighteen);
- Personal (or internal) stigma is a prejudice against oneself based on involvement in something (“I’m fat”).
- Interpersonal stigma - external and internal stigma
Residual deviation
In the work of Thomas Scheff, the theory of stigmatization developed into the theory of residual deviation. Its author believed that many mental illnesses are the result of social reaction and human choice. This controversial statement is one of the tenets of critical social theory. Sheff's idea came about after a rethinking of social norms.
Modern culture is different in that all people within the same cultural space must share approximately the same way of thinking. These norms are fixed in human behavior in childhood through upbringing. In order to make the child socially adapted, parents instill in him all those attitudes and habits that are considered necessary for a full life in society. A “bad” child may refuse to recognize these guidelines, and then he finds himself outside the social circle of his peers. The exact same principle works with adults.
Criminological development of the concept of anomie
The most popular concept among sociologists of that time was anomie. In 1938, Robert Merton published Social Structure and Anomie, which applied Durkheim's concept of anomie to criminological problems. One of the main ideas of R. Merton was that the main cause of crime is the contradiction between the values that society aims people to achieve and the possibilities of achieving them according to the rules established by society. This contradiction leads to the fact that a person who has not been able to obtain certain values according to all the rules begins to deny the rules and strives to obtain them at any cost. R. Merton's article gave a powerful impetus to the use of the phenomenon of anomie in explaining the causes of crime.
In 1961, Merton's student R. Cloward and his collaborator L. Olin published the monograph Juvenile Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Youth Criminal Gangs. The authors convincingly showed that society, while instilling various values in adolescents, cares little about whether their achievement is realistic for the majority of young people. In reality, only a few can acquire these values through legitimate means. Most are forced to show dexterity - to violate moral standards and legal requirements. When young people from the ideal world created by the moral teachings of educators find themselves in real life, they begin to experience disappointment and frustration. Typical reaction to this:
the creation of gangs of thieves in which, through theft, young people get the opportunity to live in accordance with the prevailing standards of consumption in society;
joining in aggressive gangs that relieve tension caused by social injustice, committing acts of violence and vandalism;
joining antisocial groups, where young people, using drugs and alcohol, withdraw into themselves, isolate themselves in a close circle of peers concerned with the same problems, and in this way try to shield themselves from the deceit and hypocrisy that surrounds them.
This book made a strong impression on R. Kennedy, on whose initiative the law on the prevention of juvenile delinquency was passed. L. Olin led a special youth empowerment program. Millions of dollars of public and private funds have been allocated to support this program. The results of its implementation were quite modest, however, according to some criminologists, it made it possible to somewhat reduce the growth rate of youth crime.
Simultaneously with R. Merton's article in 1938, Thurston Sellin's work “Culture Conflict and Crime” appeared. If R. Merton analyzed the conflict between cultural values and the possibilities of obtaining them, then T. Sellin considered the conflict between the cultural values of different communities as a criminogenic factor. The basis of his hypothesis was the results of Chicago researchers who established an increased crime rate in the neighborhoods of non-native Americans (blacks, Puerto Ricans, Italians). T. Sellin tried to explain this phenomenon with his theory of cultural conflict. His theory turned out to be more significant and not only made it possible to explain the crime of migrants, but also revealed the criminogenicity of contradictions between different social groups. Essentially, T. Sellin transformed the Marxist theory of class contradictions, eliminating its most acute and revolutionary aspects, somewhat reducing its scale, which made it possible to apply it not only to the analysis of the confrontation between two parts of society, but also to the contradictions of smaller social formations.
Based on this theory, the American sociologist A. Cohen developed the concept of subcultures in 1955. A. Cohen further reduced the scale of social groups and examined the characteristics of the cultural values of criminal associations (gangs, communities, groups). These microgroups can form their own minicultures (views, habits, skills, behavioral stereotypes, communication norms, rights and responsibilities, penalties for violators of the norms developed by such a microgroup) - this phenomenon is called a subculture. As a rule, the criminal subculture is in conflict with the prevailing values in society. By becoming part of a criminal group and having adopted its subculture, a person is freed, as it were, from other social prohibitions; moreover, their violation is often one of the norms of the criminal subculture.
Practical conclusions from this theory were the need to control the processes of emigration, take measures to bring together the cultures of different social strata and groups, and eliminate elements that cause their contradictions. Correction of the criminogenic qualities of offenders is sometimes impossible without the destruction of the criminal subculture, which, like the walls of a medieval castle, protects the criminal consciousness from the educational influences of society.
In addition to fairly pragmatic conclusions, this concept has directed the attention of criminologists to the analysis of the relationship between the culture of society and crime. This theory shows how deep the roots of crime are. Changing culture is a fairly long process, therefore the process of influencing crime cannot be momentary in nature, and one cannot count on quick results.
Nature of deviations
In his books and articles, Scheff emphasized that mental illness is only a reflection of the act of choosing values. And today this idea has many opponents. Sheff refused to accept mental health as a physical fact. That is, “abnormality” is the same conscious choice as the habit of saying hello to people you know.
The creator of the resonance theory paid special attention to the importance of the emotional factor in social manipulation. For example, children are constantly faced with a discrepancy between what they want and what they are allowed and forbidden. Their way of expressing their dissatisfaction is to cry. Gradually, children have to accept the standards of behavior that their parents instill in them.
Deviations have their own clear boundaries that separate them from the norm. In order to maintain this ratio, society constantly reminds itself of what is good and what is bad. For example, on television and in newspapers there are constantly references to thefts, murders and other crimes. People are reminded every day of the depravity of crime and the responsibility for breaking laws.
At the same time, some sociologists today are trying to prove that society, wittingly or unwittingly, preserves deviations, creating fertile soil for them. For example, prisons do not help a person give up his deviant behavior. On the contrary, the criminal finds a comfortable living environment in places of detention, which serves as a rallying point for people from the criminal world.
Stigmatization in sociology
The sixties of the last century mark the intensification of sociologists' interest in the phenomenon of stigmatization. During the period from the mid-sixties to the early nineties, many scientific studies emerged that examined a wide range of deviant behavior in individuals. Sociologists of this period considered “norm” and “deviation” not as independent and isolated phenomena from each other, but as “antagonisms” revealed in complex processes of interaction between members of social groups. Based on the approach described, the question “Who becomes stigmatized and why?” fades into the background, and the question “Who puts a mark, hanging a “label”, what grounds exist for this?” comes to the fore?
The problem with stigma lies in the consequences of stigmatization. Since its result is always social marking, that is, the separation of an individual or group of individuals from the community and subsequent opposition of him or them to the rest of the community members. The final stage of stigmatization will be complete or partial rejection from the community of the stigmatized individual or group of people. Often, social labeling becomes a factor that predetermines, on its basis, the programming and self-programming of the behavioral response of a stigmatized individual.
The term “stigma” is believed to have originated in Ancient Greece. It was first applied to bodily tattoos that signified either dependent or socially disapproved stigmatized status. Stigma previously acted as a conditional sign of social stigmatization of individuals, a factor of social positioning, and an indicator of a person’s social position in society. Stigma is a social attribute that indicates the low status of a person or group of individuals. The presence of stigma by others is regarded as a so-called “vice”, and the bearer of stigma is considered an individual deserving censure, often even punishment. Any natural characteristic or social quality can give rise to stigmatization. Consequently, stigma is, first of all, a social characteristic of an individual (group), formed by the social environment in which the action is performed.
It is believed that stigma can be of three types: neutral, positive (affirming the dignity of the individual) and negative (depriving the individual of merit and merit).
Stigma as a social phenomenon in most cases is characterized by a negative orientation and is based on the rejection by society of any pronounced distinctive external signs, for example: the external appearance of an individual, the qualities of his character, the specific features of his behavioral reactions. The “specificity” of an individual often does not pose a danger to the surrounding society, but this does not prevent his stigmatization, which leads to his condemnation in various forms of expression, the attribution of his character traits or personality traits to deviance. As a result, stigma affects an individual's behavior and self-awareness, either unjustifiably humiliating or exalting him based solely on external signs. This stigmatization is dangerous for individuals, as it negatively affects their social independence and can provoke deviance. In addition, stigmatization is also unsafe for society. After all, labeling individual groups affects public morality and the humane principles of society, causing conflicts within society. Consequently, the phenomenon of stigmatization is a kind of vicious circle, since social stigma and fear of being punished causes psychological and social alienation, which equally causes harm to both the individual and society. This is where the problem of stigma lies.
Stigma and emotions
In adults, pride and shame act as emotions in relation to stigmatization. These natural reactions are a response to social sanctions. In this case we are talking about non-verbal everyday rewards and prohibitions. Sanctions may be imaginary. A person’s regulators of shame and pride also turn on at the moment when he is alone and is not the object of direct criticism from society.
Shame gives rise to another emotion - anger. The circulation of these two feelings occurs in three stages. First there is a destruction of the social connection, then there is a breakdown in communication and, finally, it all ends in a conflict between people. Many experts agree that this pattern is a vicious circle from which it is impossible to get out without changing your own behavior. At the same time, an acute sense of shame often blocks the opportunity to restore the social connection between “normal” and stigmatized people. It often triggers a reaction of alienation.
Stigmatization of society
It is believed that the stigmatization of society is created on the foundation of one main quality, which will be indicative, and a complex of qualities ranked on the basis of the presence of the main one. This is confirmed by the following examples of stigmatization. There is a myth that women are bad drivers. This myth is a form of stigma, which in some cases is associated with gender discrimination. Since practice proves the opposite - not every woman is a bad driver, but the established stereotype implies this.
The whole world claims that “Russian alcoholics” - this statement is an example of interethnic stigma, which is based on differences in cultural characteristics. Because of its negative focus and harshness, this statement is considered stigmatizing.
The majority considers Germans to be fascists. In this case, collective responsibility, unacceptable by humanistic principles, is justified by the actions of individual subjects and state policy during the world war.
Social stigma often leads to discrimination. In other words, it leads to real actions that limit the rights of a certain group. At the same time, in a number of civilized states, explicit stigmatization and the resulting discrimination are either prohibited at the legislative level or condemned by sociocultural principles. Almost every society is full of stigmas.
Examples of stigmatization indicate the attribution of qualities to certain categories of the population that are not necessarily characteristic of them. People from the outback are generally considered to be less cultural and educated; people with HIV are treated with prejudice, since the majority are confident that they have multiple sexual relationships with different partners.
Social stigmas can come in a positive form. For example, a boxer is “praised” for his unusually sound thoughts for an individual who has dedicated his life to sports. After all, if you have strength, then you don’t need intelligence. Such “positive” stigmas can be no less offensive than labels with a pronounced negative orientation.
However, any ironic or offensive definitions should not be classified as labels. For example, you can often hear insults directed at yourself in crowded transport. However, this will not be a stigma. For stigma to occur, two components are necessary: generalization and the transfer of a “negative” quality or inability from individual members of the population to all members of a given category.
Social stigma has its own types:
- cultural stigmatization, which is the hanging of social labels that are rooted in sociocultural norms or world culture (for example, all Chukchi are slow-witted);
- personal (internal) stigmatization, consists of prejudice against one’s own person, based on involvement in something (for example, women tend to say “I’m fat”);
- institutional stigmatization is stigmatization established at the legislative level (for example, a person with a criminal record).
The concept of stigma was developed in the social sciences by E. Goffman. He first introduced the concept of stigma in 1963.
Goffman's theory of stigmatization is outlined in his work “Stigma. Notes on the ability to deal with a defective identity.” The phenomenon of sexual labels was studied by his colleague K. Plummer; he called his research “Sexual stigma: an interactionist approach.” Analyzing religious movements, the concept of stigma was used by V. Lipp in his work “Stigma and Charisma”.
Goffman's theory of stigma is based on his belief that an individual with stigma can use it to obtain secondary benefits, for example, by justifying their own failures with it. If, due to a number of factors, a subject with a stigma loses it, then he may discover that he has learned something, or come to some understanding, for example, that living with a certain label is not the worst defect of a person.
According to his theory, the normal perception and attitude towards a subject with stigma is:
- benevolent public behavior designed to weaken and smooth out the presence of stigma in a person;
— various forms of discrimination against such a person;
- a generalization of stigma, which consists in attributing additional shortcomings to an individual, based on the presence of a single defect (for example, a visually impaired person is often addressed much louder than usual, as if he also has difficulty hearing), or additional potentials (sixth sense, super sensitive perception);
— formulation of the “concept” of stigma, which is a kind of ideology designed to “open eyes” to the danger posed by such an individual, in some cases, in order to justify one’s own unfriendly attitude towards him.
E. Goffman notes that a stigmatized subject often does not understand what feelings other people “really” feel towards him. Therefore, for them, every new interaction is always an uncertainty, since they are either accepted or rejected. The stigmatized subject must constantly think about the impression he makes on the social environment.
The depressed state of the deviant
When stigmatized, the person receiving the label often experiences depression. Its root lies in the lack of reliable social connections. In a depressed person, these important contacts for a full life are destroyed. This condition arises as a logical continuation of the alienation of the stigmatized from the rest of society.
The fundamental feeling of a rejected person is usually shame, not anger or grief. Typical behaviors include an unsure soft voice, avoidance of eye contact, anxiety, slowness, and self-blame.
TIPS and THESIS FOR COMMUNICATION ACTIVITIES
The speed of spread of the so-called “infodemic” of misinformation and rumors is significantly faster than the outbreak of the new coronavirus infection (COVID-19). It increases the negative impact of the outbreak, including by stigmatizing and discriminating against residents of affected areas. Supporting communities and individuals in these areas requires collective solidarity and clear, actionable information. Misconceptions, rumors and misinformation are breeding grounds for stigma and discrimination, creating barriers to controlling the outbreak. suggests that the promotion of information from trusted sources by famous personalities massively attracts public attention to health issues, influences their attitude and willingness to seek medical help in connection with COVID-19.
— Refute misconceptions, but do not question the sincerity of people’s feelings and the actions dictated by these feelings, even if they are based on incorrect premises. — Promote the importance of prevention, life-saving measures, timely diagnosis and treatment. Stopping further transmission of the virus and reducing social anxiety requires collective solidarity and cooperation. − Strive to ensure that your content and stories evoke empathy or provide a universal perspective on the experiences and concerns of people and groups affected by the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). − Publicly support and encourage those working on the front lines of the outbreak (health care workers, volunteers, community leaders, etc.). Facts, not fears, will be the barrier to novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) - Share factual information and reliable information about the disease. — Refute myths and misconceptions. - Choose your words carefully. The way information is presented can influence other people's moods (see the section on desirable and undesirable words and expressions above).
