Suchergebnisse

Chapter 1. Introduction -- 2. Risky Neighborhoods as Specific Type of Social Space -- Chapter 3: Violence-Related Norms and the "Code of the Street" -- Chapter 4: Comparing Violence-Related Norms: A Selective Review of the Salient Literature -- Chapter 5: Research Design -- Chapter 6: Description of the German Context -- Chapter 7: Description of the Pakistan Context -- Chapter 8: Description of the South African Context -- Chapter 9: Cross-Cultural Comparison of the Code of the Street -- Chapter 10: Spotlight on Street Violence in a Cross-Cultural Comparison -- Chapter 11: Conclusion: The Need to Develop the Code of the Street into a General Approach

This book presents a comparative look at the norms and attitudes related to youth violence. It aims to present a perspective outside of the typical Western context, through case studies comparing a developed / Western democracy (Germany), a country with a history of institutionalized violence (South Africa), and an emerging democracy that has experienced heavy terrorism (Pakistan). Building on earlier works, the research presented in this innovative volume provides new insights into the sociocultural context for shaping both young people's tolerance of and involvement in violence, depending on their environment. This volume covers: Research on interpersonal violence. Thorough review of the contribution of research on gangs, violence, neighborhoods and community. Analyses on violence-related norms of male juveniles (ages 16-21 years old) living in high-risk urban neighborhoods. Intense discussion of the concept of street code and its use. Application of street code concept to contexts outside the US. An integrating chapter focused on where the street code exists, and how it is modified or interpreted by young men. With a foreword by Jeffrey Ian Ross, this book aims to provide a broader context for research. It does so via a rigorous comparative methodology, presenting a framework that may be applied to future studies. This open access book will be of interest to researchers in criminology and criminal justice, as well as related fields such as sociology, demography, psychology, and public health.

IntroductionSex workers, people who use drugs, men who have sex with men, women who have sex with women and transgender people in South Africa frequently experience high levels of stigma, abuse and discrimination. Evidence suggests that such abuse is sometimes committed by police officers, meaning that those charged with protection are perpetrators. This reinforces cycles of violence, increases the risk of HIV infection, undermines HIV prevention and treatment interventions and violates the constitutional prescriptions that the police are mandated to protect. This paper explores how relationship building can create positive outcomes while taking into account the challenges associated with reforming police strategies in relation to key populations, and vice versa.DiscussionWe argue that relationships between law enforcement agencies and key populations need to be re‐examined and reconstituted to enable appropriate responses and services. The antagonistic positioning, "othering" and blame assignment frequently seen in interactions between law enforcement officials and key populations can negatively influence both, albeit for different reasons. In addressing these concerns, we argue that mediation based on consensual dialogue is required, and can be harnessed through a process that highlights points of familiarity that are often shared, but not understood, by both parties. Rather than laying blame, we argue that substantive changes need to be owned and executed by all role‐players, informed by a common language that is cognisant of differing perspectives.ConclusionsRelational approaches can be used to identify programmes that align goals that are part of law enforcement, human rights and public health despite not always being seen as such. Law enforcement champions and representatives of key populations need to be identified and supported to promote interventions that are mutually reinforcing, and address perceived differences by highlighting commonality. Creating opportunities to share experiences in mediation can be beneficial to all role‐players. While training is important, it is not a primary mechanism to change behaviour and attitudes.