The sociology of deviance has been an integral part of the study of sociologists because of its impact on the well-being of society. Functionalists view deviance both as threatening and vital to the preservation of society. However, in recent years, labeling theorists have come to challenge the functionalists' definition of deviance as the violation of social norms. Instead, they view the reaction to deviance as critical in the definition of deviance. Nonetheless, what the functionalists and labeling theorists share in their approaches is their belief that deviant acts stem from society, rather than the individual (Douglas, 1973, p. 540).
Functionalists assert that there are immutable moral values in society that provide the basis for the formation of social norms (Nisbet, 1970, p. 289). With his study on suicide, Durkheim (1951) was the chief proponent of the functional theory of deviance (in Douglas, 1973, p. 540). According to Durkheim (1951), the likelihood of individuals committing suicide is related to the degree of their social integration. Therefore, the more the individuals are involved with their families, the less likely they are to commit suicide (in Douglas, 1973, p. 540).
At the same time, Durkheim and later functionalists feel that society has created institutions that suppress deviant behavior in order to reduce the level of crime and deviance. The police are one example. However, functionalists also believe that deviance serves an integral role in society. The adverse reaction of society against deviants and their deviant behavior can serve as a powerful reassertion of the values and norms of society. Apart from this useful function, another functionalist, Kingsley Davis, claims that deviant behavior, such as prostitution, also serves as a vital outlet for husbands and help preserve the institution of marriage (Douglas, 1973, p. 541).
Therefore, instead of attributing deviant acts to individual decisions,...