According to Interactionism, the descriptions of deviance and normality are significantly social constructions, as well as relative, implying that it depends on factors like the time, location and social background in which the act occurs whether the behavior is described as offense or abnormal (crime or deviant) (Muncie, 2001, p.15). Contrary, Marxism maintains that some law and social rules signify the interests of the influential groups in society. These refer to the individuals who have successfully inflicted their ideas and thoughts on the extensive population through oppression and ideological control. Consequently, they can impose their assumptions of crime, compared to the viewpoints of a layman individual.
Moreover, Functionalism maintains the notion that the law and norms that stipulate acceptable behavior in a given society is primarily a product of legitimacy among the society. Additionally, the society formulates and imposes such laws and social rules to the advantage of each person. Consequently, deviance refers to behavior that breaks the above agreements on what is tolerable. Functionalists consider the above defining process as primary and objective.
Crime, in the opinion of different people, refers to an act which goes against the law. Nevertheless, it is imperative, when discussing crime, to factor in several issues, which raise several significant questions concerning the manner in which a crime is viewed in a society. Considering certain questions like, who makes societal laws and why, is critical as any response to such a question is determined by debate on social and political power, class disparity and the manner in which a crime is socially constructed....
Nevertheless, it is imperative, when discussing crime, to factor in several issues, which raise several significant questions concerning the manner in which a crime is viewed in a society. Considering certain questions like, who makes societal laws and why, is critical as any response to such a question is determined by debate on social and political power, class disparity and the manner in which a crime is socially constructed. Research by Baldock (2007) identifies that Social norms and values differ extensively across myriad cultures, faiths and societies. Even though it can be argued that when the above social norms are interrupted, the contravention of social rules can be illegitimate; it is imperative to categorize between crime and deviance which equally entail the infringement of social norms (Baldock, 2007.p.45). The notion that crime is socially constructed is incredibly vague such that it could lead to a lengthy deliberation and in huge data of information of the subject. Concisely, a crime is constructed through social laws, and the resolutions of authorities, to transform some of the above social laws into criminal laws. A study by Baldock et al identifies that; a crime can be regarded as a social construction because what is illegitimate in a particular society or culture might be legitimate in another society. Crime is frequently expressed as a physical fact by the either the government or the media (Baldock, 2007). Nevertheless, it can be identified that when an individual thinks of acts which are criminal in a particular place, yet the acts are criminal elsewhere, such crime is an indication of social construction. Considering the actions of the authorities interpreting which acts are criminal, it can as well be postulated that authorities