Several sociological concepts can be related to body modification. Obviously, society plays a huge part in the whole existence of body modification. Just has Nathan in My Freshman Year describes how students decorate their dorm doors to create a unique identity for themselves, we will apply different sociological concepts to understand how people use modifications to identify/define themselves.

One theory that relates to body modification is symbolic interactionism. The overview of symbolic interactionism is that meaning is not determined. This directly relates to body modification because each modification is unique to the individual or group. For example, a tattoo of the name of a loved one is very personal – it has a special meaning to the individual. Another body modification that has a specific meaning on a larger scale is circumcision. A group that considers this a very standard procedure is Americans. Male infants are circumcised every day in America because it is considered normal, most Americans have a shared meaning of circumcision. Another, less accepted, example is that of female genital mutilation. In female genital mutilation, the clitoris is cut out to ensure that young girls remain pure until marriage. While certain cultures, such as those in Africa, consider this normal, the World Health Organization deems this practice socially unacceptable.

A part of symbolic interactionism that can be related to body modification is the Cooley’s the Looking Glass Self. Even though people get modifications for personal reasons, they still imagine themselves through other people’s perspectives. The three parts of the looking glass self each relate to body modifications:

We imagine our appearance to the other person – when you have something noticeably different with your body, you often become self-conscious of how other people see the difference. What does the tattoo look like in their eyes? How does the corset-piercing look to them? We imagine the judgment they’re making – do they think the tattoo looks stupid? Do they understand the meaning behind it? Do they think this nose ring suits me? Whether people like to admit it or not, humans are very self-conscious of what the people around them are thinking about them and how they are interpreting their appearance. We have a feeling about the other person’s judgment – based off people’s expressions, we can get a vague idea of what other people are thinking of the body modifications.

Another theory that relates to body modification is Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory: are modifications a sort of costume/prop to fit in with a particular scene? Are they a part of the role? The answers to both of these questions could be yes or no. When you engage in body modification, you do become a part of a certain crowd. An example of this is the Juggalos, a group of people that are known to be obsessed with the Insane Clown Posse. This group is easily recognized due to their facial makeup. This makeup also helps them fulfill a certain role: this makeup identifies them as a member of this group. A less extreme example of using body modifications to fit a certain role is that of makeup: makeup is a way to modify your appearance, making it a body modification. Though we never really think about the use of makeup as a way to fit a certain role, it definitely is.

(A picture of a juggalo)

Body modification can also be looked at from a functionalist theory standpoint. Durkheim’s idea of social facts, which are a part of functionalist theory, relate to body modifications. A social fact is any way of acting, whether fixed or not, capable of exerting over the individual an external constraint. So, this allows us to ask how do/have social facts define what modifications are extreme and which ones are normal? Social facts establish a sort of “informal dress code,” which body modifications sometimes violate and sometimes don’t.

Just like the functionalist theory was applicable to body modification, so is the conflict theory. According to conflict theory, it is the social elites that control the definition of socially established norms. So, there is a conflict between what they define as acceptable and what the “modified deviants” believe to be acceptable. The powerful social officials do not see extreme body modifications, such as forked tongues, as acceptable. However, those people that are considered lesser because of their modifications do not see why their behavior/appearance is abnormal.

Some see body modification as an act of deviance. Some modifications can be seen as deviant behavior because society uses cultural context to establish norms. Why do people deviate (why do they get these modifications)? Maybe they do it as a result of how they were raised (their parents had a lot of modifications so they thought it was normal) or perhaps they are psychologically disturbed and use modifications to satisfy these disturbances. There are a lot of different possibilities as to why people deviate by getting body modifications.

The last way we will examine this phenomena is to use C. Wright Mills’ idea of personal troubles and public issues: is this modification a result of an identity crisis, or is it part of a much larger act of rebellion that could potentially be a risk of society? Should the general public be concerned about the growing number of “weirdos” with body modifications seen today? Or should modifications be viewed as a personal trouble; they could just be the result of someone acting out against a hard time that they are going through.

All in all, there are several different ways to look at body modification. The reasons for body modification cannot be easily explained as the can be viewed on a personal level as well as from a sociological perspective. There are several different sociological concepts that could explain why people engage in extreme or non-extreme modifications, you just need to use your sociological imagination to apply them.