Gystilyn O’Brien – April 10th, 2025 (in peer review)

Abstract

The term ‘deviance’ has changed greatly over the last several decades, in part due to the rise of acknowledgement regarding the status of mental health disorders, marginalized stratification, and the simple fact that the status quo has begun to adopt those languages and modalities historically assigned to the criminal or disabled for themselves. With such changes in social structure regarding equality and social acceptance, it is necessary to take a look back into history to understand why we have ‘demonized’ such terms and concepts labeled as ‘deviant’. Additionally, from an evolutionary standpoint we may need to consider how societies are changing the definition of such terms to represent a wider spectrum of human experience and how those new definitions may alter the pre-existing stigmas so specified by social stratification. The following article focuses on the history of the term ‘deviant’, its applications in the medical and judicial fields, how various minorities have used said terminology and definitions as means of protection, and how modern developments in social change are altering such terms and definitions for inclusivity. 

Introduction

Deviance has long been considered the representation of illegal or dangerous activity within a society, despite little to no clarification regarding what, specifically, constitutes such actions, behaviors or words. In considering the deviant person, or deviant behavior, we must first acknowledge that such a term is and has been intended to define those people who are not considered the ‘norm’. (Sagarin, 1979) Such a definition brings the startling truth that anyone deemed unlike the ‘norm’ would thus be considered deviant. The norm in this case would more succinctly reference the ruling class, apt at setting the ‘status quo’, and would thus define anyone unlike themselves to be deviating from said standard. Such labels and definitions can be extremely damaging, particularly when applied to the macro perspective of marginalization, intersectionality, and institutionalization. 

Labeling, a term which describes those titles we place on individuals or groups to compartmentalize them, hopefully for organizational purposes, tends to inflict a great deal of harm on those receiving said labels. (Tumin, 1953) Where one might imagine that a person’s race, for example, is a reasonable label, we can see that when said racial label becomes a racial slur, or forces said labeled people into segregated areas based on those labels, that there are intrinsic problems not with the concept of labeling, but with how it is used and executed. The label ‘deviance’ proves to contain many such concerns and issues with how it’s been used throughout the centuries, including its associations with mental health, biological abnormalities, and class stratification. Additionally, the label ‘deviance’ as associated with criminalization and medicalization has proven to be of major concern, particularly when it comes to wrongful institutionalization due to outdated social assumptions instead of logical due process. Throughout this paper we will take a look as to how the label deviance has been abused throughout institutionalization, and how deviance has been appropriated through various minorities to express a thriving community of free thinkers with their own applied languages of deviance. 

Descriptive Analysis

 Sociological Interpretation of Deviance 

Melvin M. Tumin, a sociologist during the 1950’s was keen to take a deep dive into the concept of social stratification. Stratification is the action of labeling or grouping data, people or objects into groups. Émile Durkheim, considered the Father of Sociology in 1850’s France, was keen to bring understanding as to why society functions as it functions. (Cristi, 2012) In considering property and labor, Durkheim was led to understand that the grouping of data, objects, people, is entirely natural to the human species, and frankly to nature at large, i.e. stratification. Later (1954), sociologists Kingsly Davis and Wilbert Moore built upon the concepts Durenheim brought to the table, focusing specifically on the nature of socially applied stratification, or how the people at large tend to group themselves by the apparent (at the time) social laws of society. They, in short, reflected that inequality and stratification were guaranteed within any society regardless of structure or moral priorities. 

Tumin took a strong critique to their approach in saying that inequality and stratification were edifices of man based upon systems they built for themselves, as opposed to something occurring naturally within society as Davis and Moore alluded. (Tumin, 1953)  The very first line of his essay Some Principles of Stratification: A Critical Analysis says, “The fact of social inequality in human society is marked by its ubiquity and its antiquity.” (Tumin, 1953) He goes on to say, “Every known society, past and present, distributes its scarce and demanded goods and services unequally. And there are attached to the positions which command unequal amounts of such goods and services certain highly morally toned evaluations of their importance for the society.” (Tumin, 1953) The notion that societies have always existed in such formats is worth considering in the longevity of humanity, yet Tumin focuses on the fact that such things are optional and manifested by those in power. Realistically it was not so much that Davis and Moore considered social stratification as something which occurred naturally, as much as they looked upon the society and times for which they lived, the evidence of previous societies before them, and considered only what was at face value evident. Instead of considering the notion of power-over or a conquering status-based idealism, as is preferable to those in powerful positions and who format and guide their societies to their whims, they believed the system of heigher-archy to be natural eventide instead of an intentional one.

Tumin’s perspective is of the utmost importance when considering deviance because he brings to light that social labeling and distribution of goods and resources is intentionally formatted to support the few and not the whole. (Tumin, 1953) A system of this type would need to have a disposition for defining who on the supply chain would receive what when, and the easiest way to do so after social stratification would be to assign higher-archy, or in this case classism. Said classism is often seen in greater perspectives than simple income. Rather we see classism in racism, gender intersectionality, homophobia, addiction, mental health, and of course, criminal behavior, all of which can fall under the labeled term of ‘minority’, or in this case, ‘deviance’.

Institutional Oppression – Criminality and Medicalization

The label ‘deviance’, as termed by Émile Durkinehm was actually put into active use not via race or crime, but rather through disability.  In 1953 a series of psychiatrists including Harry Stack Sullivan were investigating the mental processes associated with schizophrenia. (Billow, 1994) Sullivan believed that interpersonal relationships were a key component within schizophrenia, and that the schizophrenic patient would intentionally use altered language to express themselves as a means to attract and fuel interpersonal relationships. (Billow, 1994) This ‘altered language’ eventually became coined as ‘deviant language’ by The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. [DSM-IV]; American Psychiatric Association in 1994. (Billow, 1994) The concept of ‘deviant speech patterns’ quickly caught on through media promotion and this form of widespread propaganda set the stage for a labeling epidemic of massive proportions.

In a paper titled Falling Away ino Disease: Disability-Deviance Narratives in American Crime Control by Matt Saleh (2022) we are shown the devastating associations made between crime and associated terms such as ‘deviance’. In this paper instances of criminal behavior conducted by people who also have mental disorders such as “Asperger Syndrome, “psychopathic,” or antisocial and personality-disorders” (Saleh, 2022) is shown to draw social conclusions that the association of deviance with crime has existed as a standard perspective for a long time. The prevailing concept expressed in this paper is that all criminals are likely to suffer from some form of mental disorder (deviance). The issue with this assertion is that in turn, this may lead the general public to believe that all people with mental disorders must be criminals. (Saleh, 2022) Such assertions give reasoning behind segregation of anyone with mental disorders as being criminally deviant by social definition. 

Such assertions are supported in the book The Language of Crime and Deviance : An Introduction to Critical Linguistic Analysis in Media and Popular Culture by Andrea Mayr and David Machin, 2011. “This book for the first time deals specifically with the role of language in this process, showing how critical linguistic analysis can provide further crucial insights into media representations of crime and criminals.” (Mayr, 2011) ‘Process’, in this case describes “crime, deviance and punishment” in how  “media constructions of young people and women; media and the police, ‘reality’ crime shows; corporate crime; prison and drugs” affects public opinion. (Mayr, 2011) With the implementation of the internet and social media we now suffer from a secondary level of education following that of outdated polarized medical journals wherein such outlets as the news, TV shows, movies, and general social content are structured in such a fashion as to support the plausible claim that criminality is associated with mental disorders. 

Argumentative Analysis

The Social Construction of Deviant Populations

Given the influences of social media and preceding medical and criminal journals it is no surprise to see that the term ‘deviance’ has become so encompassing. With ‘deviance’ including anyone with mental health disorders, those people who have disabilities, those who may require accommodation, may look different, may speak differently, act in unusual fashions, it is clear to see that really all forms of marginalization would fall within the definition spectrum of ‘ab-normal’ or ‘deviant’. For the sake of clarification it is important to understand that the US population as of 2024 is 340,110,988 with a whopping 75.3% as marked white population, with roughly 13.6% of said total adult (over 18) population as marked ‘disabled’. (US Census) Considering the proportions it is understandable that definitions of ‘normality’ or the ‘status quo’ would be considered white ableism. Conversely, in a survey performed by the CDC in 2022 11.4% of US children under the age of 17 have been diagnosed with ADHD which, when combined with the US Census data would raise the total percentage of population within all age spectrums as acknowledging some form of mental disorder or disability to at least 25% of the total US population. 

The intrinsic problem, of course, with social stratification when it comes to grouping people via ableism versus disability is that the numbers are unlikely to represent the true population due to stigmatization. When stigmatization affects people to a degree where their safety is in question they will by nature choose to mask or hide their differences to protect themselves. (Busch, 2020) This sort of social alienation is dangerous on many levels because not only does it make it harder to provide support to those who need it, but it also supports the concept that white ableism, or ‘status quo normality’ is preferred and correct to being different in any way. Conformity may offer degrees of safety but it also simultaneously destroys personal freedoms. One of the ways said minority groups have been able to identify each other despite such stigmatization is through the use of various forms of language.

In a paper written by A. Damirjian, in 2024 titled The social significance of slang, he addresses the very usage of altered ‘deviant’ language in society, not only from the perspective of how we promote deviance through stigmatized language by assigning labeling, as reflected in Andrea Mayr and David Machin’s paper, but also how a growing population so labeled deviant will create a language of their own to code-switch and or work around the language of stigmatization as informed by the dominate ‘normal’ population. 

The Role of Language in Protection and Communication

Consider for a moment the Black Panther Party (BPP) of the 1960’s. This group of educated lower class black Americans were at the forefront of the Civil Rights Movements stating that it was their constitutional right to bear arms, to defend themselves and their property from their oppressors, and to, quite simply, exist with the same rights as every other human on the planet. (Smithsonian, 2019) BPP leaders engaged in a practice of code-switching, that is, using words in such a fashion that a particular group of people will understand what is being said. (Johnson, 2021) Those forerunners (such as MLK Jr., Huey P. Newton, and Malcom X) basically spoke in a manner which was accessible specifically for a white ableist 1960’s population. Meanwhile, the remainder of the Black Panther Party spoke in both this manner, and in a manner relative to their culture, in this case Jive or various forms of Patios more generally known as Slang, and more recently coined by the academic community as African American Vernacular English (AAVE). (Luu, 2020) 

Such cultural forms of language represent both a throw back to cultural heritage, and a notion of safety amongst minorities. (Damirjian, 2024) When the AAVE is in use around a predominantly white culture, where that culture has been informed through media propaganda to distrust the minorities groups as being ‘different’ or ‘deviant’ or ‘criminal’ because of assertion like ‘one criminal had mental health issues, so all people with mental health issues must be criminal’ or ‘one black man committed a crime, so all black men must be criminal’, what the white community hears is words they don’t directly understand, and so interpret as hostile. (These quotes represent social assumptions that can not directly be cited because they are both common knowledge and a functional ideal, not represented by any one specific entity.)

As Damirjian (2024) quoted as a critique in his own essay: 

“Slang denotes an informal, nonstandard, nontechnical vocabulary composed chiefly of novel-sounding synonyms (and near synonyms) for standard words and phrases; it is often associated with youthful, raffish, or undignified persons and groups; and it conveys often striking connotations of impertinence or irreverence, especially for established attitudes and values within the prevailing culture. (Lighter, 2001, p. 220)

“Associated with youthful, raffish, or undignified persons…” is a key component to the issue of stigmatization. Who decides those things? Who determines what is slang or why it’s being used? If a white ableist American educated by propaganda and prejudice hears a black American using AAVE, or even speaking in their ancestral native tongue, do they assume that that black American is using slang, and that the purpose of doing so is derision? Yes. The simple truth is yes, as is clearly witnessed by the continued lynching of black Americans by white supremacists.  (Dr. Fran, 2021) *it should be noted that while language may not be the specific reason for these atrocious racial hate crimes that it does play a part, as much as skin tone plays a part.)

The use of Slang, Jive, Patios, has historically represented not the “and it conveys often striking connotations of impertinence or irreverence” as Lighter is quoted above, but rather a language of deviance wherein minorities of all kinds have developed a language of safety, code-switching, nods of protection, to separate and acknowledge themselves as indeed being different from the ‘average norm’, which in this case also often represents their oppressors. Going back to the notion that schizophrenic patients will use ‘altered language’ to convey safety in interpersonal relationships it’s easy to see that this effect of sociolinguists is not specific to minorities of color. 

In an article titled The Language of Trauma: An Introduction by Brigitta Busch (2020) she relates that patients diagnosed with various forms of PTSD will indeed create a specific language, much as schizophrenia patients do, to help identify danger, safety, compassion, and interpersonal relationships. (Busch, 2020) The concept of Gallows Humor fits in perfectly here as it’s a noted phenomena that people with PTSD will tend to engage in higher forms of sarcasm and self deprecating statements than those without trauma diagnosis. (Damirjian, 2024)  Gallows Humor allows for a spectrum of emotions to engage without going so far in depth of those emotions as to cause panic attacks or disassociation. (Busch, 2020) 

The Need to Reinterpret Deviant Language

Damirjian’s paper additionally brings into perspective the use of slang or ‘deviant language’ as something to be considered evolutionary in sociolinguists. He explains that due to the widespread nature of media and social media that various forms of slang have in more recent generations replaced Standard American English as the preferred form of communication. Whether this be emoji’s, short-hand, or Gen Z’s truly bizarre stacking of one-liner memes they have turned into an entire code, Damirjian acknowledges that the time to embrace slang as a standard form of sociolinguists has come. 

Combined with the growing acknowledgement of mental health disorders in this country, and in support of minority cultural languages, it is understandable that this new generation, who does not see race or gender in the same way their forefathers did, would implement a language that is holistically more inclusive. The notion of code-switching to cope with ostracization within various groups such as the LGBTQ+ communities has gained incredible traction over the last decade, just as the nature of code-switching has grown with the BIPOC communities over the last century. (Damirjian, 2024) The simple reality is that such forms of code-switching and sociolinguists have always existed as a means to support the oppressed and it is only with the advancement of technology that society at large is beginning to comprehend the vastness of said oppression and the need for community support and acceptance, in all areas of the population. 

Conclusion

From a macro-perspective the need for sociolinguist inclusion of this kind is necessary in considering socio-evolutionary perspectives. Though our country’s census percentages may still show an overwhelming number of white abelists in this country, the data also shows that statistically every one of those people are likely to know and engage with a minority of one form or another. (VanderWeele, 2013) Access to the interest has also made what was before more easily hidden or ignored, impossible to hide. Minorities are public, in the face of the population at large, and are not going anywhere. 

Inclusive language forms such as Jive, Patios, Slang, and Gallows Humor represent only the accessible tip of the iceberg compared to AAVE, foreign languages of nationality (Native American, Asian) or mental health languages common in various forms of mental disorders and trauma (deviant language). Curiously, when it comes to the larger American white population a good portion of them actually use such forms of Slang like Gallows Humor to cope with their PTSD, despite looking down on minorities who do the same. Our government and media outlets may want to lead the larger population into believe it’s an us versus them situation out there, but the truth is that all America people are oppressed in some fashion, most of which is often denoted through stigmatization such as how people talk, how they dress, who they hang out with, what they watch, and in short, who they are. The language of deviance represents the languages of all people, a preverbal Tower of Babel in the 21st century, and it is through these forms of expression that we may be able to bring inclusion and support to our people, so that we might see better mental health and safer social environments for all.