Lemert's Labelling Theory

Relevance
Labelling theory proposes that deviance is socially constructed through the surrounding reactions on a certain behaviour instead of the action. In other words, the theory claims that behaviours are not inherently deviant on its own. But, instead, it is the reaction to the behaviour that makes it deviant. Edwin Lemert's labelling theory distinguishes two types of deviant labelling and explains how being negatively labeled can cause long-term consequences for a person's identity in the society. Primary deviance is when a person violates a social norm initially which does not interfere with the person's character. It is those deviant acts that just about everyone does once or twice in the society. It has little reaction which also means
She is demanded to write an apology letter to the student as a punishment, and instead of acting out she never does it again. This demonstrates primary deviance in that the punishment stopped her from committing other deviant acts in the future. She is not labelled by other students and can resume her daily school life safely. But now, suppose that Sarah is bullied and accused by other students for stealing. She is called names and cannot not fit in with her peers because they would not let her in the circle. Her teacher even calls other parents to inform them about the incident to reason why students should not bring valuables to school. Because of these strong reactions, Sarah starts to accept her new identity as a deviant and continue to steal. It has now become her master status. Eventually, she will start engaging in with those students who also steal where her identity is accepted in the group. This example strongly shows how crucial labelling and reaction is. Sarah could have stopped stealing or it could have prevented her from future deviance if her classmates were not so
Thus, they create deviants by giving them the situation to commit deviancy. For example, if people did not hate such a person on their deviant act, the deviant may not commit other harm in the future. But it seems that the society and the people who start labelling is the cause of possible future consequences. This can also be seen in the media where anti-fans show hatred and negative comments to celebrities which lead the famous to do illegal drugs to cope with stress. Also, it also comes to question if it is possible for a group of people to plan to punish or neglect a certain targeted individual. For example, in our history, many innocent women were killed because they were accused to be witches. However, within those innocent women, what if someone accused a woman because they purposely hated them and made a group of people to go against her? Similarly, in Christianity, before Jesus was crucified, the scholars who wanted him to be gone were the ones who started the whole accusation, which then led to the king to decide whether to really kill an innocent man. In the end however, because majority of the people wanted Jesus to die, the King gave orders to hang Jesus on the cross. This shows that labelling can kill or cause serious harm to innocent