Why I am Deviant

To say whether I am deviant or not deviant is akin to declaring whether a zebra is black or white. That is to say, the two are hardly mutually exclusive, at least as far as deviance pertains to me. Instead I prefer to think of deviance as more of a continuum of deviant to not deviant, of which I would place myself more towards the former end of the spectrum, although to what degree is hard to be certain. To help articulate my place along this “deviance continuum,” I will appeal to two theories, “Control Theory” and “Strain Theory.” Briefly, Control Theory assumes “that delinquent [deviant] acts result when an individual’s bond to society is weak or broken,” and uses elements such as attachment, commitment, Involvement and belief to explain the bond, or lack there of.¹” Strain Theory holds that society exacts pressure upon individuals via a heavy emphasis on specific cultural goals and a lack of “corresponding emphasis” on institutionalized or accepted means of attaining those goals. Essentially, achieving the goal becomes more important than conforming to the mores of society and individuals without available institutionally accepted methods are forced to deviate. Either one deviates by not ascribing to this culturally affirmed goal or by deviating in order to attain it. Strain Theory provides five types of adaptation individuals may use within the society, conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, and rebellion.²

Much like the concept of deviance itself, the elements and adaptations in these two theories are not necessarily exclusive of one another. In fact, several of these rationales for deviant behavior may apply simultaneously to an individual; this is especially true in my instance. If I were to detail my life and accomplishments on paper, one would likely assume that I was generally not deviant, as my goals and means of achieving those goals fall largely within the “conformity” adaptation, or “conformity to both cultural goals and institutionalized means.”³ That is to say that my goal, to become a lawyer and eventually a judge, is easily associated with wealth and success, which according to strain theory is the affirmed goal of American society.⁴ Additionally, my method of the achieving the goal, serving in the United States Marine Corps and earning the Post 9/11 GI Bill to pay for college tuition, is an institutionally accepted means. That being said, one would be hard pressed to describe this…

...as the default or not deviant. At a relatively young age I developed a substantial disdain for the value placed upon aesthetics and outward appearance in American Society, believing it to be shallow and lacking substance. More importantly, I felt the privileges granted to “well dressed” individuals unwarranted and entirely arbitrary. It was my intention to extract people’s preconceived notions about and I welcomed unfounded judgments against me based solely on my outward appearance, my personal favorites being that I was a “devil worshiper,” “Druggy,” or a “bad student,” none of which I am. However, I believed those not willing to look past their initial judgments and actually get to know me were not worth my friendship or time. This clearly illustrates the “rebellion” adaptation in the context of strain theory, or the “rejection of prevailing values and the substitution of new values.”⁵ The key point being that, for me (the individual), these “prevailing” values are arbitrary and thus lack legitimacy. So although my goals and means of achieving them conform to society, I largely reject the arbitrary values of society and substitute my own for a “closer correspondence between merit, effort and reward”, thus I would consider myself more deviant.

When considering control theory, the elements of commitment and involvement serve to explain why, most of the time, I am not deviant. I have always prided myself on being and analytical, pragmatic, rational individual. For me, the reasoning for your actions is as important as the actions you take (if not more). Thus when considering a deviant act, I am essentially left with the question, “is the juice worth the squeeze.” Are the risks and repercussions of illegal or deviant acts worth the benefits? I often find the answer to be no (possibly because I am privileged to have other means available to me). This coincides with the element of commitment within control theory. That is, risking my prior investments in education or “acquiring a reputation for virtue”⁶ was not worth the risk of stealing a (insert expensive thing here). Put simply, I never stole, used drugs, or skipped class etc. out of fear of reprisal. Secondly, as a youth and an adult I was and am too involved to be deviant most of the time. For example, in my junior and senior of high school I was attending Lower Columbia College full time), co-captain of the Castle Rock wrestling team, and worked full time as an assistant manager at the Burger King. I was “simply too busy doing conventional things to find time to engage in deviant behavior,” which is the principal of commitment within control theory.⁷   That is until, June 12^th, 2007, high school graduation day. On this day I would be arrested, and cited for a gross misdemeanor or as I like to call it, streaking at your high school graduation. The attachment element of control theory helps to explain this particular incident. The attachment element essentially states that people are “moral beings to the extent that we are social beings.”⁸ In other words we internalize society’s norms from other people sharing them with us, but if one does not share attachment with others they are likely to be insensitive to their opinions and do not feel bound by their norms and is thus free to deviate. Growing up I definitely fell into this category, I never had any significant attachment to my siblings, my parents; and my small group of close friends were mostly deviants themselves. As such I was never very concerned with the values or opinions of others because I rarely had people share them with me. Thus when school faculty told the graduating class of 2007 that we were required to wear dress shoes, and slacks under our robes to present a more “prestigious” appearance (a value I did not ascribe to), I responded by duck taping pant legs to my shins and cutting my shirt in half to wear under my robes. Upon receiving my diploma, I turned, faced the cameras and discarded my gown via a convenient front zipper and proceeded to sprint down the graduation lane, evading police for about 10 minutes. This day I had decided that the Juice was worth the squeeze. Again, although I generally conform to society out of fear and reprisal and lack of time to do otherwise, my lack of attachment to others ultimately resulted in a lack of concern for their values and the deviant behavior of me renouncing them (in my own way) publicly. It would then seem that I would be considered more deviant than not.

Experiencing Deviance

To help further my understanding of what it is and feels like to be deviant I decided to dress in Goth, and take my wife shopping at the Westfield Shopping center in Vancouver. This particular wardrobe or style of dress is considered to be deviant by most and is commonly associated with an anti-religious sentiment, overly emotional or whiny “emo” individuals, drugs and, as I learned, apparently poverty. The most common reaction to this behavior or appearance by the mainstream is to ignore it and avoid people who dress like this. After perusing the mall stores for about an hour I had encountered little resistance or confrontation to the way I was dressed, no one had said anything (that I heard) or made noticeable remark about my appearance. It was not until my wife and I entered one of her favorite stores, Fred Meyer Jewelers. This was not the first time I had been in this store, in fact I am repeat customer, having purchased my wife’s engagement ring, wedding band, and anniversary band (among other gifts) there. To date I have actually spent over 5000$ at this franchise and generally speaking their service is fair, honest and polite. This would not be the case on this day however. My wife and I were in the store for over 15 minutes with only 3 other guests present before someone acknowledged us, and when they did the question was put rudely, “Are you going to buy something.” The question when read may seem polite but put into the context of tone. It sounded more like “you obviously broke bastard, buy something or get out of my store before I call security.” It would seem apparent to me that do to my new wardrobe I was no longer considered a serious or able customer, and I was likely there to steal something. Thus, the consequence of having “Goth” as your master status (the initial label by which people judge you and then filter your actions through),⁹ is not being considered as a legitimate customer or human being. Essentially, because of the way you dress you are disregarded as the “crazy” or ridiculous incredulous “other”

1,6,7. Hirschi, Travis. “Control Theory.” Readings in Deviant Behavior. Ed. Alex Thio, Thomas Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston, MA: Hanson 2010. 30-32. Print.

2,3,4,5. Merton, Robert. “Strain Theory.” Readings in Deviant Behavior. Ed. Alex Thio, Thomas Calhoun, Addrain Conyers. Boston, MA: Hanson 2010. 21-26. Print.

9. Williams, Meredith. Washington State University. WSU Vancouver Campus, VMMC Building, Vancouver, WA. 26 Jan 2012. Lecture.