To Be Deviant or Not

Deviance is an interesting subject considering I have met many people in my life who would be considered deviant.  If you are unfamiliar with deviance means it is the behavior, ideas, or attributes of an individual or group that some people in society find offensive.  The range of deviance is extremely broad, but a topic that caught my eye was the labeling theory.

This theory defines itself by stating that deviance is the consequence of the application of rules and sanctions to an offender; a deviant is an individual to whom the identity "deviant" has been successfully applied.  A person within a relationship who might be unfaithful is labeled as untrustworthy and will likely repeat the same actions.  An ex-convict will be labeled as a criminal and that they will not succeed in life without being a criminal.  Finally, if a coach were to pay players to hurt someone on the opposing team how would he be labeled by the public eye?

Coach Sean Payton

This question connects with a current issue with Sean Payton.  He is (was) the head coach of the New Orleans Saints, a NFL team. Sean Payton and defensive coordinator, Greg Williams, put a bounty on opposing team's players.  If the bounty was met and the player was hurt they would pay cash to their players.  Sean Payton is currently suspended for one season and Greg Williams is suspended indefinitely.

For more info regarding the allegations go to this site:
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/bounty-345628-suspended-payton.html

Regardless of the outcome of the trials and appeals that will occur over the next year or two, the big question is how will these coaches be labeled for their deviance?  Does celebrity status allow deviant acts to slide by or are they taken more seriously?  We will never truly know the answer to this.  Many people speculate that Sean Payton will keep his coaching job with the Saints and will continue his successful legacy.

Is this fair?  Within the past year, coaching great, Joe Paterno was put under the chopping block for the sex scandal of another coach at Penn State.  He had no affiliation with what happened but was labeled as "dirty, naive, and irresponsible" for being the head coach at the time of the events.  So how can one coach assist in a deviant act of promoting the injury of opposing players without much negative labeling and a coaching legend has his persona torn apart because of the acts his fellow coach committed?

This is where I see the flaw in the labeling theory.  People misunderstand the actions of a person and the affects of the environment at the time of the deviant act.  Sean Payton did take full responsibility for his actions, but he is still given the chance to appeal his case and continue coaching.  Meanwhile, a coaching legend is ripped of his job and livelihood because of the selfish acts of a fellow coach.  I see a large discrepancy and do not agree with the labeling theory.  I would put a label on someone depending on the severity of their actions and only if they personally were affiliated.  And I believe everyone deserves a second chance and if they ruin this chance then it is fair to give them a negative label.  Whether or not you agree, deviant acts will be deviant acts and society will immediately label a person whether they like it or not.  Just another reason why our society is no where near perfect...