Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Code of the Street

The “code of the street” represents modern criminology's influential subcultural statement on how life in inner-city America gives rise to increased levels of crime and deviance, particularly violence. Rooted in Elijah Anderson's ethnographic account of life in inner-city Philadelphia, the code is depicted as a reaction to an environment plagued by profound feelings of despair. Life in the inner city is characterized by a lack of jobs, limited public services, the stigma of race, drug use and abuse, and drug trafficking. Collectively, these cumulative disadvantages and socioeconomic deprivations in nearly all life spheres create an environment wherein very little social or financial capital is to be had. As a result, residents turn to the code as a means of obtaining what little social capital does exist—respect. This entry provides an overview of the perspective and offers a brief statement on the topic's empirical evidence.

Standards of Respect and the Regulation of Violence

The code of the street is defined as a set of informal rules that govern interpersonal public behavior within inner-city communities. The code is primarily aimed at the regulation of violence in everyday life. This code regulates the use of violence, as well as supplies the rationale for those prone to aggression to engage in violent encounters in a legitimate manner. The code also stipulates both proper demeanor and the appropriate way to respond if challenged.

The code of the street is focused primarily on the concept of respect. Within this context, respect translates into being treated “right”—in essence, receiving the proper respect or admiration that one deserves. In this view, respect is considered a commodity that is both difficult to acquire and maintain but easily lost. What one deserves in the way of respect, however, is problematic and uncertain. Indeed, what inner-city youth view as a “diss” (i.e., disrespect), most middle-class Americans would consider petty. In the world described by Anderson, the most insignificant act, such as maintaining eye contact too long, is viewed as disrespect and may lead to a violent altercation where both participants must fight or risk losing respect and reputation. To not accept a physical challenge, or to “punk out,” may result in a more negative outcome than getting physically harmed. Failing to accept such a challenge may result in a loss of respect or damage to one's reputation, as well as make an individual more susceptible to future attacks.

It becomes imperative, then, that residents of disadvantaged inner-city neighborhoods become familiar with and, to a certain extent, embrace the code of the street. Anderson's ethnographic research suggests that while not all residents wholeheartedly endorse the code, all must be aware of these informal norms and be prepared to abide by them in social interactions. According to Anderson, the inner city is organized into two different types of families—street and decent. These are evaluative judgments made by the residents themselves that confer status in the inner city. However, irrespective of orientation, individuals are expected to display both, depending on the situation—termed code switching. Code switching is highly valued among the decently oriented because it allows one to move more easily between the two worlds in which one resides.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading