Sociology of deviant tendencies violence term

Representational Interactionist Point of view, Deviance, Marking Theory, Junior Violence

Research from Term Paper:

From this example, it becomes evident that Anderson’s fundamental theory in conducting his analysis is a labeling theory. A product in the symbolic interactionist paradigm, labels theory posits that “a response to an act and not the behavior that determines deviance… (it) is the recognition that some people or groups have power to establish labels and apply those to others” (Schaefer, 1998: 165). From this definition, Anderson’s categorization of avenue people compares to the peoples’ behavior and actions because they live a life of poverty. Intended for the “criminal elements” from the society, deviance is a form of legitimacy for them to conduct even more deviant works, and thus, the continuous carry out of deviant actions reinforces the label “criminal element(s). inches Similarly, right now there exist product labels that determine people who lead double details of being able to assimilate to both the normative and deviant groups. Simply by resorting to “decent ways” of living, Anderson considers several street people as nondeviants; however right now there also times when the community shows to be even more influential compared to the individual, as a result, s/he gets used to deviant habit or “indecent ways” of living.

Anderson elucidates about these crucial points on labeling theory by saying in his discussion of street lifestyle as follows: inch… labels are being used by occupants of inner-city communities to characterize themselves and the other person… Most citizens are reasonable or are planning to be. Precisely the same family is prone to have associates who happen to be strongly focused toward decency and civility… A person may react according to either pair of rules, with respect to the situation” (36). On a more general level, it is also obvious that the author clearly distinguishes between persons susceptible but not susceptible to road life – that is, the “winners, inch who live a comfortable existence, and the “losers, ” folks who live in low income (37). Via these categories, conflict theory also emerges, wherein poor people are getting dominated and considered poor compared to the “winners, ” or those who have knowledgeable relative prosperity, comfort, and social the usage in life. Anderson’s analysis is usually parallel with the argument of conflict theory of deviance, wherein “people with electricity protect their own interests and define deviance to suit their particular needs… (social control) is often an attempt by powerful to coerce others” (Schaefer, 1998: 166). In place, Anderson’s analysis of streets life and deviant tendencies in this sector of the world provides two perspectives understand the dynamics of deviance in culture – that may be, through the perspectives of discord and labeling theories.

Bibliography

Anderson, Elizabeth. (1999). Code of the Street: Decency, assault, and the meaning life of inner city. NYC W. W. Norton.

Schaefer, R. (1998). Sociology: a short introduction. NYC: