Code of the Street = Crime?

               
                “The study of deviant behavior is one of the most intriguing yet complex areas of sociology”, (ES.Text, 153). What is deviant behavior though? Well deviance can be described as nonconformity to a given set of norms most people in a society follow. In “Code of the Street”, Elijah Anderson provides the audience with “street oriented” examples of deviance. Anderson uses two major theories to explain the origin of deviance which often leads to crime.
                Interactionist theory states that deviance is socially constructed, meaning that deviance is learned through interaction with others. This is why of all problems having to do with interaction, “none is more pressing than that of interpersonal violence and aggression”, (Anderson, 171). Through interpersonal violence and aggression, such as when children experience it themselves (or by watching their parents yell or hit each other), it’s when interactionist deviance is socially constructed. Individuals tend to become delinquents by associating with people who are carriers of criminal/ deviant behavior. Parents can be the carrier of these behaviors previously mentioned. A child does not learn how to be violent and aggressive by his own thoughts. Children learn and internalize violent patterns by associating with others whom exhibit criminal actions.  This is also known as differential association. No types of conduct are inherently deviant rather these are socially constructed.
                The Functionalist theory views crime as stemming from tensions in social structures. For example if the aspirations of individuals and groups within a society are not equal to the gratification or rewards available “…the despair can be pervasive enough to spawn an oppositional culture, that of ‘the streets’, (ES. Text, 158). This oppositional culture of “the streets” or “street oriented” opt to deviance/ crime as act of opposition that originates from tensions and inequalities between social structures. Elijah considers two groups within the social structure: the “street oriented” and the “decent” people.
                 Anderson describes how these two social structures are different but also similar. Children raised by “street oriented” parents tend to be defensive; since they are often raised in homes were violence is prevalent. These children grow up with a dog-eat-dog mentality, which in their eyes helps them develop “manhood”. On the other hand “decent” parents try to inculcate good values into their children. For decent parents manhood is having the capacity to turn away from a fight. Even though these two societies seem different they are the same when it comes to self preservation. Even as “decent people try hard to be part of the mainstream culture…depending on the demands of a situation many people, slip back between decent and street behavior”, (Anderson, 183). As hard as “decent” people try to be decent, social tensions force people to adopt street oriented attitudes and behaviors. This attitudes and behaviors become necessary to defend and preserve themselves in a predominant violent society such as the “inner-city life”.
                Poverty, social tensions and inequalities often lead to deviance, which then leads to some form of criminality. Sociologists try to understand why crime and deviant behaviors exist and where they originate from, but they do not often come to a single concise response as to why this problem exists. It is a challenge to stop all deviance, because to do so society would have to get rid of divisions between the rich and the poor. If poverty stopped there would no longer be inequalities within social structures so the violence would stop and children would no longer learn deviance and crime through interaction.