DIFFERENT ISNT ALWAYS DEVIANT! SOME THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT DIVERSITY

                    The concept of diversity might come across as a tricky one at first glance. Perhaps that is simply because it is. I am one of those sociologist who isn’t so into the positivist approach to addressing social issues. I believe individuals interpret reality based on the meanings attributed to the different symbols in society. so my thinking is guided mainly along the interpretivist school of thought.

           Okay enough big words have been thrown around, what is diversity and how is it relevant to society? Well let’s start with the basics and define diversity; According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary of English, diversity is the quality of having many different forms, types, ideas etc. it is also defined as the state of having individuals of different races and cultures in a group or organization. So how does that which is diverse get to be seen as deviant? My best answer to this is embedded in the my belief that the world view or paradigm which guides the values of a given culture or group perhaps, influences largely how diversity can either be seen as different or deviant. So what does deviance mean and what is its relation to diversity? The Merriam-Webster dictionary of English defines that which is deviant to be different from what is considered to be normal or morally correct. Robert Merton a functionalist, in his theory of anomie explains; diverse behaviour can become deviant from the moment in which there is a state of anomie or relatively a setting which includes a contradiction between what is socially acceptable and the means by which it can be attained, prevails. Even in cases where diverse behaviour fully reflects the norm (not infringing on a moral or legal order). From the instance it gets stigmatized as abnormal or non-conformist, it becomes what Merton calls anomie.

In Merton's typology he argues that deviance stems from the structure of society, he departs from the functionalist position of value consensus i.e every member of society share the same values.he explains that due to stratification in society such as difference in class positions, people don't have the same chances of realizing this shared values. this situation according to Merton is what creates deviance. now lets apply Merton's functionalist approach to our society(i will be considering the Nigerian society). firstly i would like to note that in working with Merton's theory i have taken an holistic and positivist approach so there might be some generalizations, but it will all come together when i explain the reason why i choose not to adopt this approach in addressing the concept of diversity. in the Nigerian society the goal of success is largely measured by wealth and material success(remember i am taking an holistic approach so i am assuming there are shared values amongst Nigerians). and the accepted ways of achieving this success could be through education, talent, hardwork, drive, ambition and determination. the problem however with thinking along this axis as Merton pointed out is there is always the tendency for individuals to 'reject the rules of the games' and strive to attain success by any means necessary. I know the first thing that flew into your mind is "G-boys" or internet fraudsters for those who don't understand Nigerian slangs. You are correct to thing along that line of course because as much as the Nigerian society frowns on Internet Fraud as a criminal act, a successful G-boy isn't likely to be tagged a criminal but rather a successful member of society. this according to Merton's typology is called Innovation; this response rejects the normative means of achieving success and turns to deviant means, always questionable and criminal. now lets look at all those "over-sabi" in society, those people who conform to both society goal of success and the means of getting them. this individuals are called conformist in Mertons theory(we can throw all those Lawyers and Doctors in here, you can also add that boy that keeps coming first place in every examination here too). now those people who just because they don't want to be deviant, "play it safe", are called ritualist by Merton. they are usually found in the lower middle class of society and they tend to hold on to safe routines and institutional norms. they are generally not ambitious so you they hardly have an upward social mobility in society. then there are the retreatist; this people just abandon both the goals and means and become asocial( disturb them at your own risk). this applies to the outcast, tramps, drug addicts, chronic drunkards, psychotics etc. Finally rebellion involves the rejection of both the success goals and the institutionalized means and  replaces them with different goals and means. lets look at how some of these classifications of individuals in Merton's typology look like in society.

CONFORMIST

RITUALIST

RETREATIST

REBELS

looking at the retreatist and rebels, would you consider them normal? if your answer is no then you have thus categorized them as deviant based on your idea that everyone has the same definition of what is normal. this is where i depart is explaining why diversity should not be seen as deviant but different. when diversity is considered from a micro-sociological lens and emphasis is placed on social action and individuals interpretation of society, then one begins to see why a diverse situation should not be considered deviant, because that which is considered diverse might have maintained a state which from its inception is different from the one which values are used in judging. for example if in a group of 5 people, 4 individuals like coffee and the last individual prefers hot chocolate, if the individual who prefers hot chocolate is to be judged by the shared values of the other individuals who like coffee then he would be considered deviant. but if the other four individuals accept the fact that the 'hot chocolate loving' individual has his own values and norms that guides him then he wouldn't be  considered deviant but simply different. Berger & Luckman (1966) explained that micro sociological currents mainly focus on social relations and the means by which individuals exchange meanings; it is thus by moving in this direction of micro reflections that we can identify some elements that allow us to place the concept of diversity within sociological theory. Given that our attention is on individuals and their relationships with ‘the others’. If we consider the social practices of construction and attribution of meaning, we see how social action becomes an element that in some way imposes change within the social structure. Individual and collective behaviours create the constituents of society,

   In conclusion, there are various dimensions of diversity in society today which people generally tend to stereotype as sometimes deviant, that's why issues of racism, sexism, ageism etc, all these issues can be reduced in society if we move from a structural way of thinking and lean towards accepting that every individual in the world is different and we all construct reality based on our experiences. so what is normal for me isn't necessarily going to be normal for you because not only does socialization play a big role in ones perception of the world, no two people think the same way. so if there is anything you should take from this post (its time for moral lesson o!), its the fact that one should learn to tolerate diversity in society because if a fish was judged by its ability to climb a tree, it would probably think its a failure all its life.