THE DISCUSSION FOCUSES ON CRITICISMS OF THE LABELING FRAME OF REFERENCE, TOUCHING ON SOURCES OF SUCH CRITICISM AND FORWARDING A 'CONFIGURATION' CONCEPT OF LABELING THAT ADDRESSES ISSUES RAISED BY SOME CRITICS. MOST VALID CRITICISM OF THE LABELING PERSPECTIVE IS SAID TO BE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EXTREME STANCES ADOPTED BY SOME LABELING THEORISTS, WHO INSIST THAT STIGMATIZATION IS THE EXCLUSIVE, OR AT LEAST PRIMARY, DYNAMIC IN DEVIANCE. THE CONFIGURATION PERSPECTIVE MAKES NO SUCH CLAIM, VIEWING STIGMA AS ONE DYNAMIC AMONG MANY. FROM THE CONFIGURATION PERSPECTIVE, THE PROBABILITY OF BEING BRANDED (LABELED) AS DEVIANT INCREASE WITH DEVIANT BEHAVIOR (I.E., WITH INFRINGEMENT OF NORMS), BUT DEVIANCE BECOMES A SOCIAL FACT ONLY AFTER A GIVEN BEHAVIOR, PERSON, OR GROUP OF PERSONS HAS BEEN LABELED DEVIANT BY AN AGENCY OR BY AGENCIES OF SOCIAL CONTROL. ONE CRITICISM OF THE LABELING FRAME OF REFERENCE--THAT IT MAKES SOCIAL DEVIANCE RELATIVISTIC--IS REFUTED. IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE OBJECTIVE STABILITY OR UNIVERSALITY OF SOCIAL NORMS AND HENCE OF DEVIANCE IS A MYTH. WHAT IS A CRIMINAL ACT AT ONE TIME IN ONE PLACE HAS BEEN OR WILL BE EITHER NORMATIVE OR INDIFFERENT IN OTHER TIMES AND PLACES. THUS THE RELATIVISTIC APPROACH TO DEVIANCE INHERENT IN THE LABELING FRAME OF REFERENCE IS A MAJOR STRENGTH, NOT A WEAKNESS. THE DISCUSSION ALSO TOUCHES ON THE CONCEPT OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY DEVIANCE, NOTING THAT THE DISTINCTION IS ONE THAT HAS LED SOME LABELING THEORISTS DOWN A CONCEPTUAL BLIND ALLEY. (SECONDARY DEVIANCE REFERS TO A SPECIAL CLASS OF SOCIALLY DEFINED RESPONSES WHICH PEOPLE MAKE TO PROBLEMS CREATED BY SOCIETY'S REACTION TO THEIR DEVIANCE.) THE PROCESS OF STIGMATIZATION, IS DISCUSSED, TOGETHER WITH THE EFFECTS OF STIGMATIZATION IN THE CONTEXTS OF CRIMINAL DEVIANCE AND MENTAL ILLNESS. (LKM)