Durkheim In his
Rules of the Sociological Method, French
sociologist Émile Durkheim indicates that it is necessary for the
sociological method to offer parameters in order to distinguish normality from
pathology or
abnormality. He suggests that behaviors, or
social facts, which are present in the majority of cases are normal, and exceptions to that behavior indicate pathology. Durkheim's model of normality further explains that the most frequent or general behaviors, and thus the most normal behaviors, will persist through transition periods in society.
Crime, for instance, should be considered normal because it exists in every society through every time period. There is a two-fold version of normality; behaviors considered normal on a societal level may still be considered pathological on an individual level. On the individual level, people who violate social norms, such as criminals, will invite a punishment from others in the society.
Social norms An individual's behaviors are guided by what they perceive to be society's expectations and their peers' norms. People measure the appropriateness of their actions by how far away they are from those social norms. However, what is perceived as the norm may or may not actually be the most common behavior. In some cases of
pluralistic ignorance, most people wrongly believe the social norm is one thing, but in fact very few people hold that view. When people are made more aware of a social norm, particularly a
descriptive norm (i.e., a norm describing what is done), their behavior changes to become closer to that norm. The power of these norms can be harnessed by
social norms marketing, where the social norm is advertised to people in an attempt to stop extreme behavior, such as binge drinking. However, people at the other extreme (very little alcohol consumption) are equally likely to change their behavior to become closer to the norm, in this case by increasing alcohol consumption. Instead of using descriptive norms, more effective social norms marketing may use
injunctive norms which, instead of describing the most common behavior, outline what is approved or disapproved of by society. When individuals become aware of the injunctive norm, only the extremes will change their behavior (by decreasing alcohol consumption) without the boomerang effect of under-indulgers increasing their drinking. The social norms that guide people are not always normal for everyone. Behaviors that are abnormal for most people may be considered normal for a
subgroup or
subculture. For example, normal college student behavior may be to party and drink alcohol, but for a subculture of religious students, normal behavior may be to go to church and pursue religious activities. Subcultures may actively reject "normal" behavior, instead replacing society norms with their own. What is viewed as normal can change dependent on both timeframe and environment. Normality can be viewed as "an endless process of man's self-creation and his reshaping of the world." Within this idea, it is possible to surmise that normality is not an all-encompassing term, but simply a
relative term based around a current trend in time. With statistics, this is likened to the thought that if the data gathered provides a
mean and
standard deviation, over time these data that predict "normalness" start to predict or dictate it less and less since the social idea of normality is dynamic. This is shown in studies done on behavior in both
psychology and
sociology where behavior in
mating rituals or
religious rituals can change within a century in humans, showing that the "normal" way that these rituals are performed shifts and a new procedure becomes the normal one. Since normality shifts in time and environment, the mean and standard deviation are only useful for describing normality from the environment from which they are collected.
Sexual behavior As another example, understandings of what is normal
sexual behavior varies greatly across time and place. In many countries, perceptions on
sexuality are largely becoming more liberal, especially views on the normality of
masturbation and
homosexuality. Social understanding on normal sexual behavior also varies greatly country by country; countries can be divided into categories of how they approach sexual normality, as
conservative, homosexual-permissive, or
liberal. The
United States, Ireland, and Poland have more conservative social understanding of sexuality among university students, while
Scandinavian students consider a wider variety of sexual acts as normal. Although some attempts have been made to define sexual acts as
normal,
abnormal, or
indeterminate, these definitions are time-sensitive.
Gayle Rubin's 1980s model of sexual 'normality' was comprehensive at the time but has since become outdated as society has liberalized.
Regulation A disharmony exists between a virtual identity of
the self and a real
social identity, whether it be in the form of a trait or attribute. If a person does not have this disharmony, then he or she is described as normal. A virtual identity can take many definitions, but in this case a virtual identity is the identity that persons mentally create that conforms to societal standards and norms, it may not represent how they actually are, but it represents what they believe is the typical "normal" person. A real social identity is the identity that persons actually have in their society or is perceived, by themselves or others, to have. If these two identities have differences between each other, there is said to be disharmony. Individuals may monitor and adapt their behavior in terms of others' expected perceptions of the individual, which is described by the social psychology theory of
self-presentation. In this sense, normality exists based on societal norms, and whether someone is normal is entirely up to how he or she views him- or herself in contrast to how society views him or her. While trying to define and quantify normality is a good start, all definitions confront the problem of whether we are even describing an idea that even exists since there are so many different ways of viewing the concept.
Effects of labeling When people do not conform to the normal standard, they are often labelled as sick, disabled, abnormal, or unusual, which can lead to
marginalization or
stigmatization. Most people want to be normal and strive to be perceived as such, so that they can relate to society at large. Without having things in common with the general population, people may feel isolated among society. The abnormal person feels like they have less in common with the normal population, and others have difficulty relating to things that they have not experienced themselves. Additionally, abnormality may make others uncomfortable, further separating the abnormally labelled individual. Since being normal is generally considered an ideal, there is often pressure from external sources to
conform to normality, as well as pressure from people's intrinsic desire to feel included. For example, families and the medical community will try to help
disabled people live a normal life. However, the pressure to appear normal, while actually having some
deviation, creates a conflict—sometimes someone will appear normal, while actually experiencing the world differently or struggling. When abnormality makes society feel uncomfortable, it is the exceptional person themselves who will laugh it off to relieve social tension. A disabled person is given normal freedoms, but may not be able to show negative emotions. Lastly, society's rejection of deviance and the pressure to normalize may cause shame in some individuals. Abnormalities may not be included in an individual's sense of
identity, especially if they are unwelcome abnormalities. When an individual's abnormality is labelled as a
pathology, it is possible for that person to take on both elements of the
sick role or the stigmatization that follows some illnesses. Mental illness, in particular, is largely misunderstood by the population and often overwhelms others' impression of the patient. ==Intrapersonal normality==