Agree or Disagree: Society Sucks

Ran into a relative who I don't see often.

Her: What do you teach?

Me: Sociology.

Her: What's sociology?

Me: Study of society.

Her: Society sucks!

I find it difficult to refute her point.

Facebook Is Television

I'll just write, free form, without hyperlinks or images. I'm writing to write, to write out loud, and writing instead of watching TV or watching Twitter. I'll write for a while, until my 2-year-old wakes up from a nap. He might nap for an hour, or two, so that gives me time to write and wonder.

What comes to mind first? I guess I've been wanting to say something about Facebook. I want to say something about why I'm glad I didn't have Facebook in college, kind of a response to this piece by Nathan Jurgenson that I like. I know, I said no hyperlinks, but that's only one. Jurgenson makes a lot of good points in the post. It would be nice if we weren't so worried about our image, and if we weren't so scared of our "digital dirt" (a phrase he uses that I really like), but how can we not be afraid of our digital dirt? So many  people in this world are so quick to judge, to use information against you, to hold you accountable to the "worst" parts of your past. I guess I just wanted to briefly and simply say that people are judgmental. Jurgenson asks:

What if more people wore past identities more proudly? We could erode the norm of identity consistency, a norm no one lives up to anyways, and embrace change and growth for its own sake.

That's a really good question. And maybe he's right. And maybe people aren't as judgmental as I think. Sometimes we want to be judged by our best work, not by our more foolish and immature moments, and I think that's partly where the "Glad I didn't have Facebook in high school" (or college) statement comes from.

* * * * * * * *

Now comes the part when I refer to something I said in Introduction to Sociology last semester. I was talking with students about Facebook, and comparing Facebook with television, and then I blurted out "Facebook is television." I don't know if anybody has already said that, or written about it. Please alert me if someone has. I don't want to steal someone else's idea (or plagiarize). It's getting impossible to be original in this day and age. There are too many smart people writing smart things. Well, "Facebook is television" is a pretty simple thought anyway. Facebook, like television, is something that's on. Remember when Bruce Springsteen wrote "57 Channels (And Nothin' On)" Sugar, that's hyperlink number two. A blogger can't help himself. Anyway, the Springsteen song is from 1992. We were already complaining about all the crap that's on. Now it's three million channels and nothing is on. I think that's a reason people complain about Facebook: much of the time, there's nothing on. That's not to disrespect our friends and family members who post pictures of their kids or their dinner. But how many times does one want to see a rerun of somebody else's cute kid? How many times can you watch a rerun of How I Met Your Mother? (What's up with that show, I can't figure it out for the life of me. I've never made it through an episode, so I must be referring to people who watch it a lot).

Well, you get the point. There's a lot on. There's a lot to consume. Same for Twitter. Which is why I wonder if the term "backchannel" should just be "channel." The hashtag lets us check out what's going on behind the scenes (or, should I say, what's going on in the scene). It's surfing through Twitter and seeing what's on.

Okay, I haven't said anything about producing content. I recognize we are producers-consumers these days, but I tend to focus on consumption. A serious question: what does the research tell us about the ratio of consuming to producing? Is it accurate to say that most people consume way more than they produce? I'm inclined to think from the perspective of a consumer. Maybe it's because I consume a lot. Yes, I produce too, but not as much as I consume. Honestly, I need to study up on prosumption. Maybe I give too much attention to being a consumer.

In any case, thinking as a consumer, I think there's something to the notion that "Facebook is television." Facebook, Twitter, television, YouTube, Vine (first impression: Vine is pretty cool) give us a million of channels to watch (and gripe about). Forgive me for all the parentheses. I probably use too many when I write. And I know we're not always griping about what's on. We enjoy much of what we watch. What we watch makes us laugh and makes us feel a whole bunch of emotions. "A whole bunch of emotions" is a badly written phrase. It's a sign that I've been writing for 42 minutes without a break.

So I will take a quick break to grab a drink of water.

I'm back after a few minutes. I ended up exchanging a few text messages with my wife.

Well, I'm going to give this post one quick proofread and wrap it up. Mack might surprise me and wake up any moment. And by the time I come back to this post, I might just delete it or decide not to post it.

I did some proofreading and minor editing. I've been at this for an hour now. I've been thinking about this stuff for a long time, but the actual writing and editing took one hour. So know that it's not totally thought through. So why post it? Why not sit on it longer and make it better? Well, I told you, I just wanted to write out loud for a while.

Tim Lauger, Author of Real Gangstas

Here are some video clips of Tim Lauger, my colleague at Niagara University, talking about the research he conducted that led to his book Real Gangstas. In the first clip, Tim answers my question about why he chose "Real Gangstas" as his title.

In the next clip, Tim talks about urban ethnography.

Tim spent a year and a half in the field. In the next clip, he talks about bringing participants to his home on one occasion.

In the final clip, Tim explains what he means by the term "dilution narrative":

Sociology in Stories: A Creative Introduction to a Fascinating Perspective

Here is some background about my book Sociology in Stories: A Creative Introduction to a Fascinating Perspective.

I set out, quite simply, to write a book that my students would read. For more than ten years, I assigned Introduction to Sociology textbooks in my courses. Through the years I'd notice students flipping through their books during class to catch up with something I'd referenced. So many times I'd see no markings at all: no highlights, no underlining, nothing in the margins. Their books had barely been touched. What a shame that the books weren't being read. Truth be told, I didn't love the textbooks either. So often I'd venture away from the textbook and do my own thing. I'd cover parts of each chapter, but more and more I'd steer in my own direction, rely on my own thoughts and observations, and discuss sociology in ways that weren't happening in the text. Finally, I broke away from the feeling that I had to require students to buy a traditional textbook. I felt free and ready to do something different.

The first phase of writing my book involved me typing many of the things I'd been saying in class. So I began putting my sociology lessons to paper. The book began to take shape, and I worked into creative methods of introducing students to thinking sociologically. My book does not consist of 1,000 definitions. It is not a complete history of the discipline. What, then, is my book? It is about the sociological perspective, brought to readers through a collection of stories and discussions. There are a lot of fictional stories with post-story discussions about the sociological components in the stories. There are also nonfiction stories about everyday life. The stories and discussions are informed by sociological ideas, theories, and research. The writing style is (I hope) fun, accessible, interesting, informative--and I hope it leaves readers wanting for more sociology.

Here are some of the contents in my book, along with a brief description of the contents. Please note this is not the entire table of contents.

"Society Gets on My Nerves Sometimes" (A story about McDonaldized society.)

"My Favorite Tattoo Ever and the Problem with Positive Thinking (Includes a discussion of Barbara Ehrenreich's book Bright-Sided.)

"That's Ghetto" (References the work of Nikki Jones' book Between Good and Ghetto.)

"Circumstances" (A sociological analysis of Jay-Z's song "December 4th.")

"Life Is an Information Game" (Goffman, Goffman, Goffman!)

"My Old Schools" (About educational inequality. Do we live in a meritocracy?)

"Homework" (A discussion of work life and home life, based on Arlie Hochschild's research.)

"(Not a Rich) White Guy" (A reflection on white privilege and middle-class life.)

"Let's Talk about Sex" (A story about hooking up. The story draws on research by Lisa Wade and Caroline Heldman.)

"Drinking Beer and Stealing Money" (A story inspired by differential association theory.)

"A Race I Can Win" (A story inspired by strain theory.)

"Iron Cage Tattoo" -- click here for story (Weber, what else?!)

"Permanent Punishment" (a story based on Peter Moskos'  book In Defense of Flogging.)

"Punishment in Society" (a discussion of Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow.)

"Dying Wishes" (Intro-level books usually avoid the subject of death. Here I dive right in.)

"America the Beautiful" (A fictional story about the future of society--immigration, social class, physical appearance, media, inequality.) Click here to read story.

"Families" (a nonfiction story about a married couple based on my interview with two men who adopted two sons).

There's much more. The book is not a loose assortment of stories. The stories are tied together by theme and narrative. If you have any questions, feel free to e-mail me (tas@niagara.edu). You can purchase or request a copy at the publisher's website:
https://www.kendallhunt.com/schoepflin/

Poverty Amid Plenty

What happens when a sociologist crosses a historian in a parking lot? This morning, as my colleague Michael Durfee and I walked into our office building, he told me he wanted to share something that Martin Luther King said about poverty. Michael, a Ph.D. candidate in the history department at SUNY Buffalo, pointed out these words from Dr. King:

"Poverty is a glaring, notorious reality for some forty million Americans. I guess it wouldn't be so bad for them if it were shared misery, but it is poverty amid plenty. It is poverty in the midst of an affluent society, and I think this is what makes for great frustration and great despair in the black community and the poor community of our nation generally."

Michael provided me with background information about this quote. Dr. King appeared at the sixty-eighth annual convention of the Rabbinical Assembly on March 25, 1968. At the convention King responded to questions submitted in advance to Rabbi Everett Gendler, who facilitated the event. The answer that you see above was in response to a question about the Kerner Report and how to work towards social justice and equality.  

Michael and I have a shared interest in inequality. Earlier this semester, we both attended a panel discussion about inequality. At the event, a viewpoint was expressed that poverty in America isn't so bad. The basic point was that poverty is much worse in lesser developed countries. After all, poor people in America have TVs, so how bad can poverty be? I strongly disagree with that line of thinking. I don't think that any poverty is good poverty. When Michael showed me these words from Dr. King, he referenced the panel that we had attended. The passage reminds us of how difficult it is to endure poverty in a rich nation. Poverty is difficult to endure anywhere. But there is an extra layer of frustration and strain that impoverished people experience in a land of plenty. If everyone is poor, it's hard to be poor and it doesn't feel good. It sure doesn't feel better (maybe it even feels worse) when you're surrounded by excess.

Source of quote: Clayborne Carson et al. (editors). 1991. The Eyes on the Prize Civil Rights Reader. New York: Penguin Books. The quote appears on page 402.

Ideas for Breaching Experiments

I can't stop thinking about breaching experiments. I don't know why. Well, maybe I just want to have fun. I won't go into a long description of breaching experiments--that's already been handled in a classic post on Everyday Sociology Blog. Basically, it boils down to intentionally breaking norms to see what kind of reaction you get.

I started obsessing about breaching experiments earlier this week at the grocery store. I felt like people were giving me weird looks. I'm not a paranoid type, but it really did seem that people were looking at me. Maybe it's my beard (Yesterday I ran into a colleague who said I look like Franco Harris. Highlight of my year). Anyway, feeling like people were looking at me for no good reason, a thought popped into my head: it would be fun to say "Got a problem, boss?" to the next person who looked at me. Keep in mind I am small, far away from physically imposing. The reactions would be so interesting. Of course I didn't do it, but it's an idea for a breaching experiment.

Since then, I came up with two more ideas for breaching experiments. The first is to sing a song at a public library and see what happens. A long and dramatic song might work well, like Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven," or a song with adult content would garner interesting reactions, like Adina Howard's "Freak Like Me." I heard that one on satellite radio yesterday, brought me back to the mid-1990s!

My other idea is to reply to all texts with a rude text, like STOP TEXTING ME. Friends and family surely would be confused. You might burn a few bridges and have a lonely weekend, but sometimes you have to suffer for sociology!

Update 2/17/2013:

I just got home after a pleasant dinner with my family at a decent restaurant. Nicer than an Applebee's chain type restaurant, but not a fine dining establishment. A place where folks were quietly enjoying a pretty good meal in a pretty nice place. I felt the urge to yell "Welcomes to Moe's!" Sadly, I didn't follow through. But there you have it; another simple idea for a breaching experiment. Next time you're in a coffee shop, or a bar, or a house party, or really anywhere except Moe's, shout "Welcome to Moe's" whenever somebody enters.

As for the next time you visit Moe's, be sure to greet customers by hollering "Touch your toes!" or "Hug your foes!"

Update 7/8/2013:

Took my kids to the town pool today. While my 5-year-old was getting a swim lesson in the "big pool," I watched my 2-year-old play in the baby pool. There was a bunch of parents hanging around the pool, supervising their kids. I had the urge to knock out some push-ups on the concrete surrounding the pool. I'm not in great shape, but not in terrible shape either. I'm sure I could have impressed with a quick set of twenty. Can you imagine the reaction to a middle-aged guy doing push-ups for no apparent reason? But, as always, I resisted doing something out of the norm. Had I done those push-ups to intentionally generate a reaction from onlookers, it would have been a fine breaching experiment.

Note 3/4/2014:

If you are going to do any kind of breaching experiment, please give serious consideration to the effect it might have on people. In this post I am only imagining experiments; I have never done any of these and I have never assigned breaching experiments in my Sociology courses. But I realize that students in other courses find their way to my blog when they search for breaching experiment ideas. This post actually gets a lot of page views. Common search terms include "ideas for breaching experiments" and "fun breaching experiments." The spirit of this post is to have fun thinking about breaching experiments that could be done. It's important for me to recognize that students actually carry out breaching experiments. We need to consider the possible effects on innocent bystanders who have not asked to be involved in an experiment. Those who enact a breaching experiment should proceed with caution. There are ethical issues to consider. Do the ends of breaching experiments justify the means? Is it ethical to treat strangers in a discourteous way? Is it ethical to inconvenience them or make them uncomfortable? Upon reflection, I don't think my example of singing a song in a public library is a good idea. I admit that thinking about it remains humorous to me. But to actually do it would be discourteous to library patrons. I'm reflecting on breaching experiments after reading a well-written article in Teaching Sociology by Matthew Braswell. As he writes, “The subjects of a breaching experiment, it must be remembered, have places to go, schedules to meet, and no knowledge of the fact that they have just walked into a sociological exercise. They deserve a modicum of care and consideration.” He poses an important question: “does the breaching experiment truly hold the potential to reveal otherwise unattainable insights?” If I think about my idea to sing a song in a public library, I think the answer is no. Honestly, I don't think that is an experiment worth doing. Fun to think about, yes, but sociologically valuable, probably not. He thinks that breaching experiments should be designed in a thoughtful and ethical manner. I agree with him. I think the only breaching experiment I might ever do is my idea about doing push-ups at the public pool where I live. It wouldn't put myself or others in harm's way. It wouldn't inconvenience anyone, I don't think. It seems harmless, silly, and has a bit of sociological value. 

Update 11/24/19:
Yet another example of a breaching experiment....

Breaching experiment pic.twitter.com/hBqiYoi0Gh

— @ToddSociology (@ToddSociology) November 23, 2019

Athletes and Religion: The Case of Tim Tebow

I don't know much about Tim Tebow. I do know that he's a Christian. To use 21st century terminology, that's his brand. My impression is that he is serious and sincere in his religious convictions. And my impression is that media outlets have largely approved his displays of religious beliefs both on and off the football field.

I would love to hear a discussion about this. Maybe the subject has already been discussed at length, but I haven't heard it. If ESPN has covered it, I wouldn't know, because I find it painful to watch ESPN. And national sports talk radio shows strike me as boring and distasteful; for example, Jim Rome. But this does seem like a topic that Rome would delve into during his show.

What interests me about the general topic of athletes and religion is the question of appropriate (or inappropriate) displays of religious beliefs on the football field. Of course, what's considered appropriate or inappropriate is a subjective call. That's what makes it interesting. Over the years, I've listened to media figures talk about athletes who point to the sky after scoring a touchdown in negative ways. I've heard many a media personality condemn teammates who circle in the end zone to join in prayer. Overall, I would say that athletes who demonstrate their religious beliefs on the field of play have encountered disapproval. But with Tim Tebow, I'm not sure that's the case. But I defer to people who watch sports and cover sports for a living. They would know more about the tone and content of coverage with regard to Tebow.

If Tebow has generally received positive (or even neutral) coverage about his on-field displays of religious beliefs, that begs the question Why? If he has in fact been treated with respect for his religious convictions, I'm curious to know why this might be. I emphasize that I'm not exactly sure of how he's been treated, so that's why I'd love to hear more about the matter. I came across one story that describes mixed reactions to Tebow. The story includes a link to the website tebowing.com, which has pictures of people apparently imitating Tebow. Some of it's for laughs, some of it seems staged, so it's hard to tell if it's "all in good fun," or mockery, or something else.

I do want to mention race as a possible factor here. Over the years, athletes who faced criticism for on-field displays of religious beliefs have generally been black players. Is Tebow getting a positive response, in part, because he's a white player? Or because he's a white quarterback? I am posing these questions for discussion, I am not posing them as facts or as my opinion. As I've said, I don't know enough about how Tebow's been handled by media so far. I just wonder if race is part of the issue in this case. So I put all of this out there for contemplation and consideration.

Using "Otis" by Jay-Z and Kanye West to Talk about Social Class

First, allow me to acknowledge the source of this teaching exercise. Karl Bakeman (tweeting from @wwnsoc at the time) retweeted something from Nikki Jones (@socprofjones). She recently tweeted "Best critique I've seen of Jay-Z and Kanye's 'Otis' - from the Black Youth Project" and included a link to an article.

Having recently heard the "Otis" song on the radio, I was curious to read the critique. I found the criticism to be very interesting and insightful. Basically, it boils down to saying that the song is over-the-top in terms of bragging about money and material goods. If you watch the video, you'll see the standard visuals: expensive cars, watches, sneakers, and beautiful women. In the song, there are references to supermodels, champagne, diamonds, private jets, and money. Kanye sings about his "other, other Benz." All of this, according to the article, is shallow and out of touch. This is no time for such an excessive display of riches, the writer says. In tough economic times with a high unemployment rate, the song and video offer an unnecessary show of a luxurious lifestyle. Furthermore, the writer says, this is not what their audience wants to hear. In essence, it's overkill.

I liked all of the author's points, and went to my Introduction to Sociology class on a Friday morning to discuss the video and the author's viewpoints. I showed the video and asked for reactions. During the discussion I brought up points from the article. I found that students (at least those who spoke out) disagreed with the writer. They didn't find the video to be over-the-top or "in your face." One student described Jay-Z as someone who embodies the "rags-to-riches" story. Another said that Jay-Z and Kayne would be criticized if they were singing about the streets, or being in jail, or glamorizing a criminal style. In other words, he argued, they'd get criticized for singing about the streets or singing about being rich. So they can't win. Another student said that people continue to "drool over" the materialistic lifestyle that is rapped about in the song. So, the student said, people do like to hear this kind of song. None of my students voiced an opinion that was in agreement with the critique.

I came away from the class thinking that people firmly believe in the American Dream. No matter that the economy is stalled and millions of Americans are struggling. People still cling to the Horatio Alger myth (anyone who tries hard enough can get ahead). I suppose that people like to see the outcomes of this hard work (material goods and riches). If it's presented in hyperbolic fashion, so be it.

I'm curious what students at other colleges and universities think about this song and video. Do they relate to it? Find it entertaining? Does anyone find it to be repulsive? Foolish? Or out of touch? In any case, the exercise makes for a good discussion about social class.

Talking occupations with my 4-year-old son

This is a short video of my conversation with my four-year-old son about occupations. He would like to be a teacher, thinks only boys are firefighters, doesn't want to be an "Army guy," and doesn't know what a plumber is. Don't worry, I'll explain that women fight fires too!

It's interesting to think about how children form their ideas about different occupations. My son responded positively to the question about being a garbage collector--I wonder if and when his views will change, considering it's a job that is ranked low in terms of prestige.

To Parents of Sociology Majors

Dear Mom or Dad,

If your son or daughter is majoring in Sociology, don't worry. He or she will get a job. I won't claim that a Sociology major is a fast track to being rich, but I do think it can enrich a person's life and well-being. Seriously. If your child is majoring in Sociology, it probably means your child has a deep curiosity about the world. It probably means your child doesn't take things for granted, that (s)he doesn't view things as being "obvious" or "common sense." Your son or daughter is likely attracted to Sociology in order to make sense of the world. Simply put, your child is a thinker, and that's a good thing. The Sociology major develops critical thinking skills. The Sociology major develops problem-solving skills. The Sociology major develops communication skills. And a Sociology major is a sign that a student takes an interest in diversity and can work well with others.

Okay, you say, that's fine, even nice, but how about some practicality here? No problem. Think of all the jobs that aren't tied to a specific major. The person who sold you your last car probably has a college degree. But they didn't major in Car Sales. The person who helped you buy auto insurance or home insurance has a college degree. But they didn't graduate with an Insurance degree. The person you call when you have questions about your health insurance plan is likely to be a college graduate--and they didn't graduate in Health Insurance. You get the point. There are lots of jobs that don't exclude Sociology graduates. Keep in mind that if you don't pay your bills, you might get a call from a debt collector--and who knows, the worker might have a degree in Sociology!

Alright, maybe those jobs don't excite your mind and maybe your son or daughter wouldn't be happy at those jobs. Well, let's look at other options. Is your child thinking about law school? A degree in Sociology is good preparation for law school. Does your child want to help people? Meaning, might they go into Social Work or Counseling? To move up the ladder, they'll eventually earn a Master's degree in Social Work or in Counseling -- and a degree in Sociology won't prevent them from getting into those graduate programs!

Maybe your son or daughter would like to travel abroad to make a difference in lesser developed countries. Surely you've heard of the Peace Corps -- a perfect opportunity for Sociology majors! Maybe your child (who won't be a child forever--face it, they're actually grownups!) would like to teach English in Japan or Korea. Again, perfect for a Sociology major. If that's too much adventure for your taste, maybe you can convince your son or daughter to make a difference at home -- see AmeriCorps for example.

I've only scratched the surface here. There is much more available to the Sociology major. Sociology majors work in jobs that assist developmentally disabled individuals. They work in jobs that educate and counsel young people who are from disadvantaged (and sometimes troubled) backgrounds. They work in law enforcement.

In sum, Sociology majors do lots of things. In my experience as a Sociology professor who has talked careers with many students over the years, I find that students in Sociology are eager to help people and make a difference in life. They aren't always motivated by money and material goods. But don't worry, to major in Sociology is not to end up living in the Poor House. You can make a good living as a Sociology major. And what good is it if your child has a major that is more directly connected to making a lot of money but that major doesn't make your child happy? The happier your child is, the harder they will work at school. If they love Sociology, they will do well in Sociology. They will find a path to a job, even if the path bends now and again. Please don't stifle your child's interest in Sociology. Encourage it! Tell them to earn good grades and to get an internship. Tell them to volunteer during the school year and in summer. You know that life is about relationships and connections. And so teach your child to make connections through internships and volunteer opportunities (examples are United Way and Habitat for Humanity).

On a final and personal note: I majored in Psychology as an undergraduate. I decided to pursue a Ph.D. in Sociology. My friend's father was an influential administrator in our local school system. He encouraged me to get a graduate degree in Psychology so that he could get me job at the local high school as a counselor. I followed my heart and earned my Ph.D. in Sociology instead. Now I am Associate Professor of Sociology at Niagara University and have been Chairperson of the department for five years. Not everybody who studies Sociology will end up being a professor someday, but it's my hope that Sociology leads them to happiness and fulfillment, as it did for me.

Just Another Day

Our baby woke up at 1:30 in the morning. No problem, I hurry to his bedroom to feed him a bottle, and he's back down to sleep. He wakes up again at 5:30. My wife's turn. This time, our little guy doesn't go back to sleep. He's UP! I take him downstairs to start the day, and my wife grabs twenty more minutes of sleep. I hang out with our tired baby until our 4-year-old joins us by 6:30. He's an early riser too--6:30 is close to sleeping in for him. I pound coffee to try to get moving but fail to eat breakfast. So I'm jittery and tired. Tina's upstairs getting ready for work, and after she gets everything organized for the boys, she heads out for work at 8:00. My parents are coming soon to watch the boys for the day. By 8:30 the baby is ready for a nap, so I try to put him down. Not happening. The sound of my baby crying doesn't bother me. The sound of my baby screaming does. Unfortunately he opts for screaming, so I take him out of the crib. I call my parents. "Don't worry about coming here. I'll bring the boys on my way to work." I throw my work bags into the car (for some reason I can't consolidate all my books and folders into one bag), toss in my lunch, and add the kids' stuff. Off to their grandparents we go. So what if the baby didn't nap, I figure he'll sleep in the car. Wishful thinking. Little baby is delirious and laughing at anything and everything. Thankfully 4-year-old Troy is behaving. He's just happy to be in his pajamas (it was the only way to coax him into the car. He was expecting to be home today). I can't exactly drop off the boys and run to work, because baby Mack has gone from delirious to exhausted. He's on the edge of screaming again. He'd probably like his mom right about now, but I'll do. He looks at me and puts out his hands. That tears my heart apart everytime. I bring him upstairs to the room that used to be my brother's bedroom. I sit in a rocking chair and get the baby to sleep. I'm afraid my wife is going to call home to check on us, and that she'll be worried if no one answers. So I stand up, continue to rock the baby, and fire off a text to let her know where we are. I look at the clock--I've got class in about an hour. After a little catnap, I hand little Mack off to my mom, leave, and race to a drive-thru. I just need a little more coffee. I get to my office at 10:30, which leaves me time to eat a banana and yogurt. I make a few minutes for small talk with colleagues and pretend everything is fine. At 11:00 I head to class and do a solid job teaching Introduction to Sociology. I'm back in my office by 12:30. "I can do this, I can do this" I say, realizing I've been up since 5:30, have held back tears at least three times in the morning, and feel like I've already put in an honest day's work. But I've got one more class to teach this afternoon, plus office hours. My day isn't over until 5:00. Then I have to pick the boys up and drive home. I can do this, I can do this, I think.

Author's note: This is a work of non-fiction.

An Example of Social Location

Saw this story today on TV news in Buffalo, NY. Girls are not allowed to play football in a particular league. The director of the league cited safety reasons. I wonder if smaller boys are not allowed to play because of safety reasons? If the child wants to play, and her parents want her to play, I say give her the opportunity to play!

In any case, this is certainly an example of social location. Our locations in life (our gender, race, and social class positions, to name a few) influence what happens to us in society. Simply by virtue of being female, girls are being denied a sport opportunity. Can you say inequality?

* * * * * *

Update 12/18/2014: Another example of social location is having a social class position that affords you the possibility of hiring a "fitness concierge." If you don't know what a fitness concierge is, you can read about it in this New York Times article. I wouldn't have known there is such a thing as fitness concierge if I hadn't read the article. It's one thing (and one social location) to belong to a gym, it's another thing (and another social location) to be able to pay for a fitness concierge. 

Alone, Well Enough

A couple of years ago it seemed like everybody was in their own world, lost in their headphones, focused on keeping to themselves. Now it seems like everybody is connected all the time (see Facebook). People seem eager to be part of something, to be a valued piece of a network. Has the balance shifted to near-constant interaction and connectivity? Can anyone strike a balance between solitary contentedness and social interaction? Does anyone care to?

Author's note: this post is just a simple thought that occurred to me during a quiet moment this morning.

The First Day of Class

My approach to the first day of class is to keep it simple. I think too much is made of the first day. I'm not saying it's unimportant, I just think one doesn't have to be cute or clever on the first day. There's so much in the teaching and learning literature about the first day of class. I think the second day of class is much more important (more on that another time). On the first day my goal is to show that I'm an energetic and enthusiastic professor. My plan for the first day of my SOC 101 class this year is to develop a definition and description of sociology. I find that students who are new to sociology already have a sense of what sociology is. I just have to draw it out of them and work with what they give me. I simply say "Give me a word or phrase that has to do with sociology. It's okay if you're not sure." That usually produces plenty of content to establish a solid definition of sociology and the topics of interest to sociologists. It also allows me to differentiate sociology from psychology. It's a basic exercise that involves students. That allows me to show students that I want them to contribute to class. If I'm already encouraging them to speak on the first day, then obviously I'm expecting (and encouraging) them to speak during every class. That's my goal, rather than spend time on introductions and icebreakers. It's not that I hate icebreakers, I just figure they've had enough icebreakers during orientation and in other classes.


That's pretty much how I keep it simple on the first day. I introduce everyone to sociology, go over the syllabus, encourage them to visit me during office hours, and tell them to be ready for a fun and interesting course!

PS if you're wondering how to teach the incoming first-year cohort, here are two essential things you need to know to prepare to teach 18-year-olds in 2017:
http://creativesociology.blogspot.com/2017/07/two-ways-to-be-prepared-to-teach-first.html

Sociological Song

Heard this song today for the first time: "My Boys" by Taken by Trees.

Here are some of my favorite lyrics from the song:

"There isn't much that I feel I need."

"I don't care for fancy things."

"I don't mean to seem like I care about material things like a social status, I just want four walls and adobe slabs for my boys."

It's a nice song about working hard and taking pride in doing so. Pride is the goal instead of social status and material possessions. Love it!

Note: the song is an adaptation of "My Girls" by Animal Collective.

The Tell Me What to Do App

Are you unable to make good decisions? Do you find it hard to get out of your own way? Is it impossible for you to make the right call? If so, you're in luck! The "Tell Me What to Do" app is available now and promises to be the hottest item in 2012.

Unhappy in a relationship, but don't know if you should end it? Or are you tired of being single and thinking of getting back with your ex? The app will tell you what to do! Unsure if you should tell friends and family that you're really a raging conservative who loves Glenn Beck books? Consult the tell me what to do app! Can't figure out if you should go shopping the day after Thanksgiving with the masses? Already planning to be a super consumer but not sure what to buy? No problem, the tell me what to do app will figure it out for you! Are you confused by people who aren't exactly like you? Don't know what to say to them? If so, the tell me what to do app provides an easy fix! Have you lost your moral compass? Are you lacking in ethics? No problem, the tell me what to do app is a master of knowing exactly what to do and when to do it!

Why bother with your own decisions when an app can make them for you? Imagine how much more efficient your life would be if you didn't have to worry about any life choices. The app can tell all of us what to do! Order now!

Church Sign - "Forget About Yourself"

I took this picture yesterday in Kenmore, NY. Have to say, I wouldn't mind dropping in for this sermon. "Forget About Yourself" is an interesting message, but good luck achieving it in this culture! It seems to me that "Forget About Yourself" is a countercultural message considering the Me-Me-Me-Me-Me society in America. Nonetheless, it's intriguing to see a message that goes against the grain.

Church Sign

I've taken an interest in signs outside of churches. In my neighborhood, there are lots of signs outside churches -- some with Bible verses, others with clever thoughts. I'm going to start collecting pictures of them as another way to investigate the social world. I found this one to be especially clever (taken in Kenmore, NY). I suspect I'll find that many of the messages communicate specific values to parishioners and the general public.

Doing Gender

"Doing Gender" is a classic sociological concept developed by Candace West and Don Zimmerman. Their article "Doing Gender" was published in Gender & Society (Vol. 1, No. 2, June 1987, pp. 125-151). Here are summary points about doing gender, based on their article.

1. "Doing gender” means that gender is a routine accomplishment in everyday life.

2. We “do gender” every day, all the time. It's an ongoing activity. We can’t avoid doing gender.

3. We do gender in interaction. 

4. Gender is not simply what a person is, it is something that a person does, in interaction with others. It is a product of social interaction. A production. A construction. A social construction.

5. And we do gender knowing that we will be judged by others. In other words, we are accountable for our gender performances. In this video, sociologist C.J. Pascoe brilliantly explains how the boundaries of masculinity are policed in social interaction in high school. (If video link to interview doesn't work, use this link to watch Pascoe discuss the use of homophobic taunts to police masculinity in interaction). 

6. If we behave outside the boundaries of normative gender scripts, we risk being judged harshly by others.

7. Keep in mind that, from an early age, we learn about “doing gender.”

8. Little girls are taught to value their appearance more so than little boys.

9. Little boys are taught different things than little girls.

10. “Be a big boy” and “Be a big girl” are different messages that convey different meanings about “appropriate” gender behaviors. This means not only "don't be a baby" but to learn how to "competently" be a boy or girl.

11. In this process, boys and girls begin to monitor their own behavior and the behavior of their peers in terms of whether the gender behavior is “appropriate.” (Appropriate, according to normative gender behaviors). The authors write: "And note, to "do" gender is not always to live up to normative conceptions of femininity or masculinity; it is to engage in behavior at the risk of gender assessment" (p. 136). 

12. Sociologist Tristan Bridges gives an excellent example of how we do gender with wallets and purses.

13. Doing gender can result in social stratification: if, in doing gender, men are being dominant and women are being submissive, this results in power differences and hierarchy!

14. Those who behave outside the lines of gender norms are, in effect, challenging the gender status quo.

The concept "doing gender" came to mind when I saw a wedding party at Erie Basin Marina in Buffalo. The bridesmaids wore bright pink dresses, and the groomsmen wore black tuxedos. I took a picture while walking by a wedding party. If you look closely, you'll notice two brides in the picture. Turns out two wedding parties were at the Marina for photographs. Both brides are wearing traditional white wedding gowns. Think of many weddings you've been to: all eyes are on the bride. It's her day. She's the princess, he's the prince who waits for her to walk down the aisle. Quite often, the bride's father "gives her away" to her new husband. It's all an exercise in normative gender roles. In that context, it's interesting to think about same-sex marriages and to contemplate how same-sex marriages challenge gender norms.

Another Sociological License Plate

Added a new sociological license plate to my collection today....

For more on sociological license plates, see this blog:

http://nortonbooks.typepad.com/everydaysociology/2011/05/sociological-license-plates.html