Citings and Sightings

In the wake of Thanksgiving, Digital Journal describes a new twist on the problem of food waste.  First, the context of food waste in the US:

Three researchers from the Laboratory of Biological Modeling, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, Maryland, United States of America, recently published a study that confirms the unrestrained waste of food in the United States.

Their findings are shocking: “We found that US per capita food waste has progressively increased by ~50% since 1974 reaching more than 1400 kcal per person per day or 150 trillion kcal per year. Food waste now accounts for more than one quarter of the total freshwater consumption and ~300 million barrels of oil per year.”

The article highlights a recent sociological insight into the fate of this wasted food, from research by Cornell sociologists Jeffery Sobal and Thomas A. Lyson, and Mary Griffin of the Arnot Ogden Medical Center:

Their study quantified food waste in one U.S. county in 1998–1999. They identified three options for waste food –donation, compost or landfill. The vast majority of food waste in the United Sates goes straight to landfill. According to their study, “Less than one-third (28%) of total food waste was recovered via composting (25%) and food donations (3%), and over 7,000 tons (72%) were landfilled. More than 8.8 billion kilocalories of food were wasted, enough to feed county residents for 1.5 months.”

While many regions worry about malnutrition and famine residents of most parts of the the United States need to worry about the deleterious environmental impacts their gargantuan waste of food products is having.

In a recent article discussing the arrest of a local official in a prostitution sting, The San Gabriel Valley Tribune called upon sociologists to explain why men visit prostitutes:

Some men are excited by the illicit risky behavior of prostitution; others like the consumer-oriented and simple transaction of meeting sexual needs through purchase; others say they have difficulties getting involved in traditional relationships; and still others are looking for a different kind of sex than they can normally find, according to a study conducted by sociologist Martin Monto for the U.S. Department of Justice.

Janet Lever, a sociologist at California State-LA, weighed in an alternative opinion:

“It’s not about the sex act. It’s really about creating variety. They usually do the same acts as they do with their wife or partner. Secondarily it’s about getting more sex,” Lever said.  Two-thirds of men wish they were getting more sex with their partner, while one-third of women do, Lever said. And prostitution provides an outlet for more sex that many men perceive as safer and less complicated than having an affair.

Commenting on high profile busts such as those of former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, Lever added:

“It certainly seems like these guys show a great deal of arrogance… and they have a lot more at stake than the average joe schmoe, which shows they are either delusional that they won’t get caught or they are truly driven for this act.   Joe schmoe does it too, and he may be sacrificing his marriage, but not his career.”

The author adds some demographics to the story:  The 1992 National Health and Social Life Survey (led by sociologists Edward Laumann and John Gagnon) found that 16 % of men report ever visiting a prostitute, with .6 % of men visiting a prostitute each year.

USA Weekend recently highlighted the growing fascination that Americans have with our favorite blood-sucking friends: vampires.   This phenomenon is underscored by the recent success of the Twilight series, HBO’s second-most watched series ever True Blood, and the popularity of the new CW network show The Vampire Diaries.

Karen Sternheimer, sociologist at the University of Southern California, provides commentary: 

“One reason for the intense teenage interest in newer stories, especially Anne Rice’s The Vampire Chronicles, Twilight and The Vampire Diaries, is the sense that the vampires are outsiders among us. In True Blood, they’re simply trying to fit into society. Often, they’re also seen as more vulnerable and less predatory.  Vampires look like us, but they’re different, and those are experiences that a lot of young people can relate to, especially dealing with not just the physical aspects of relationships when you’re young but also the emotional aspects, the danger vs. the draw of that so-called ‘forbidden love’ that really resonates with a lot of young women.”

Charlaine Harris, author of the Sookie Stackhouse novels (upon which True Blood is based), provides additional commentary: 

“Vampires never have to go on Social Security, they never have to have a hip replacement, they’re never going to need bifocals  They just won’t have the problems of aging that humans face, and that’s very appealing, especially perhaps to Americans.”

On that note, pay attention to how many little vampires you see roaming the streets tomorrow night.

With the downturn in the economy, there has been significant debate about whether or not Americans’ spending habits have changed for good. An article in the Chicago Tribune explores the debate, with the benefit of some sociological commentary suggesting that the change might not be permanent.

The Tribune reports:

The past decade was one of splurging, as easy access to credit cards and home equity loans enabled Americans to live more lavishly than previous generations. But as the economy has come crashing down, some predict a permanent cultural shift in spending habits. Some anthropologists and economists say more consumers will be like [some Americans] and spend more practically. They’ll buy smaller houses, eat out less and save for big purchases.

Many consumers are being forced into these changes as they watch the value of their homes plummet or find themselves swimming in unmanageable debt. But for others it’s a moral shift as they realize that all that buying doesn’t add much to their lives. “People are at that higher level where they’re saying something is wrong with the way we’re spending and it has got to change,” said Robbie Blinkoff, co-founder and principal anthropologist at Context-Based Research Group. In conjunction with the Carton Donofrio Partners Inc. advertising and marketing firm, it recently surveyed people about the economy’s impact on their spending.

The survey found that a new “grounded” consumer is emerging. These consumers are realizing that life is not defined by what they buy and that credit isn’t a true measure of their financial worth. They’re moving to limit the amount of “stuff” in their lives, the survey found. And they’re learning to live within their means. “The consumer will go through this process of evaluating what stuff they bring into their life to make sure it brings meaning into their life,” Blinkoff said. “They’ll be less superfluous.”

The economist thinks the changes will be permanent…

“It’s going to have to be a new way of life,” he said. Christopher Carroll, a professor of economics at Johns Hopkins University, said more people are realizing that things they once saw as necessities are actually luxuries. Debt is forcing many of the changes.

“What we’ll end up with is an economy where there is more investment, less of a trade deficit and spending is more in line with income,” Carroll said.

But the sociologist thinks otherwise…

Sara Raley, an assistant professor of sociology at McDaniel College in Westminster, Md., with a specialty in consumerism, said shopping is too big a part of people’s lifestyles to be drastically changed. She recently asked her students to name things they couldn’t live without and many listed cell phones, high-speed Internet and multiple televisions.

She also said television, movies and other entertainment media promote luxury living too much.

“I don’t think we’ll see permanent change unless we see some large structural change in the way we idolize consuming,” Raley said. Jean Johnson, an event planner who lives in Suitland, Md., is being a little more cautious with spending but doesn’t plan to abandon her shopping habits anytime soon–especially her shoe habit. The 46-year-old, who shops about once a week, said it’s something she enjoys.

“There are still going to be plenty of people out there who shop,” she said.

Read more.

The Tampa Bay Tribune ran a story today about whether or not environmentalism and ‘green living’ have become truly mainstream. In the article, they include some interesting sociological commentary about the movement and individual behavior.

Brian Mayer, who teaches environmental sociology at the University of Florida in Gainesville, said researchers are intrigued by what makes some people embrace a sense of personal responsibility.

The economy definitely can play a role, he said. Some people might hang on to or reuse items that otherwise would have gone to the landfill, but others experience a shift in priorities. Mayer cited a recent health survey in which migrant workers in Apopka were asked to rank their most pressing issues, including the environment. No. 1 was crime. No. 2? Adequate streetlights to prevent crime.

“Environmental issues are not always of concern in populations with unmet needs, even if their working environment is unsafe,” said Mayer, author of “Blue-Green Coalitions: Fighting for Safe Workplaces and Healthy Communities” (ILR Press, 2008).

During the 1960s and 1970s, the ecology movement, with its own green flag, was one of many popular social causes. People vowed to save the planet and clean up its waters. Earth Day was founded in 1970 as an “environmental teach-in.”

Cynicism, a sense of powerlessness, a decline in social involvement and a belief that individual needs were more pressing than collective concerns contributed to the decline in interest.

Mayer said he thinks many people have substituted a sense of personal responsibility for a group effort that would prove more effective in the long haul. “We’ll buy green products or bottled water, but critics say we’re missing the larger problem,” he said. Environmental sociologists call it “inverted quarantine” – people trying to keep themselves safe while keeping out the dangerous world.

Another sociologist considers this part of a larger historical pattern…

In “Shopping Our Way to Safety: How We Changed From Protecting the Environment to Protecting Ourselves,” (University of Minnesota Press, 2009) author and sociologist Andrew Szasz argues that people are buying products that give them a sense of safety while ignoring bigger environmental dangers.

Similar behavior occurred when Americans in the early 1960s built bomb shelters in their backyards, Szasz says.

Read more.