What is normal?

In response to Danielle's blog, the definition of normal isn't really a definition at all, it's a changing cultural continuum.
Danielle talks about what makes the circus people originally fit into the stereotypical category of "freaks," their physical attributes or unusual skills.
Then she talks about Cleo, the typical beauty, who becomes a "freak" to the viewer when she tries to poison a man for his money.
If Cleo were a normal woman who hadn't done such socially unacceptable things in the film, I believe we'd still consider the circus people as freakish, even after seeing them interact in their daily lives.
What forces the transfer of the title "freak" is when one person takes on a less socially acceptable attribute than those around them.
The circus people are freaks, but wait, Cleo is worse, so she's the real freak.
It all has to do with bias and social circumstances, cultural norms and levels of tolerance.
Physically, the circus people for the most part are abnormal. They do not statistically fit into the norm of body forms.
However, whether this makes them a "freak" or not relates to the associations society has with these abnormalities.
Freak is a negative term.
So where do we draw the line where a person is no longer simply different from us, but rather a freak?
I has to do with acceptance.
"One of us one of us we accept her we accept her," they chant at the wedding feast.
They no longer think of Cleo so negatively, they accept her.
This is a prime example of the transition from outgroup to a member of a particular community.
She is now one of them, she is no longer "other," she is more socially acceptable, and therefore less of a "freak" to the circus people, whose norm is to be abnormal.