Deviance, Labelling Theory and the Concept of Scale

Abstract

While sociologists of various theoretical persuasions have tended to construct theories of deviance which neglect empirical, cross-cultural data, anthropologists have tended to focus on social norms and have (with rare exceptions) neglected the whole topic. Anthropologists' antidote to sociology's focus on complex societies may lie in the concept of societal scale, and its relationship to the per ception, conceptualization, and treatment of deviance. The currently fashionable labelling theory is tested according to these principles. Its core concepts such as the creation of deviance by la belling, and secondary deviance, have been constructed solely on the basis of data from complex societies. In small-scale societies, where there is much interdependence and strong interrelationships, there is reluctance to label offenders, rather than specific actions, as deviants. There are few occurrences of secondary deviance, whereby the indi viduals accept and play the deviant role with which they have been la belled. In general terms, deviance is soft rather than in the sense that it does not threaten the social order. In rare cases of hard deviance, the labelling process occurs. Small units in complex societies (e.g., island fishermen) often ex hibit patterns of interdependency and attitudes towards deviance which recall those present in hunter-gatherer bands or the villages of swidden cultivators. The paper's argument is sustained by numerous ethnographic illustrations, which include the author's own observa tions during his fieldwork in Kelantan.