I recently discovered a series on Chicago Public Radio which features reports from Greg Scott, a sociology professor and documentary filmmaker.
The most recent installment explores the daily lives of women working as prostitutes on Cicero Avenue in Chicago’s West Side. Scott’s story paints a vivid picture of the complex relationship between sex and pride for these women…
Listen to ‘Women of the Brickyard’ here.
For more of Scott’s stories, look here.
In ‘A Walk on the Seamy Side,’ the Boston Globe reports on a remnant of the American Sociological Association annual meetings which occurred in Boston in early August. The article highlights a different kind of Boston history tour – visiting sites of homicides, arsons, and other illegal activities – creatively developed by sociologists.
Two local criminal experts created this “Immoral Boston” tour for a recent sociology conference – and it may be no less insightful than walking along the red bricks of the Freedom Trail. James Alan Fox, a professor of criminal justice, law, policy, and society at Northeastern University, sees the tour as a way to understand the influence major crimes have had on the city. Tour cocreator Jack Levin, a Northeastern sociology and criminology professor, has a slightly different perspective: “Crimes can be very abstract,” he said. Real crime “isn’t something you see on prime-time TV, like in ‘Law & Order,’ ‘CSI.’ I think what a tour does, by focusing on the particular spots where crimes have occurred, is lend some reality.”
The Globe concludes:
The men acknowledge their tour caters to the public’s lurid interest in terrible crimes. “For most people, Hannibal Lecter is as real as Jeffrey Dahmer. It’s a fascination, an escape,” Levin said. But “if what you know about crime is based on books, on television, movies, sometimes, it’s difficult to distinguish . . . an actual trial from ‘Boston Legal,’ ” Fox said. “Therefore [we have] a very glamorized perception of what’s happened.
“By going to the sites, it reminds us that people actually died,” he said. “It is difficult to glamorize something when you remember how many people were killed.”
Read the full story.
This Sunday’s New York Times ran a piece titled ‘Overfeeding on Information’ about our obsession with the news, especially during such a closely contested presidential election and in the midst of an economic crisis.
The Times describes this compulsion for constant updates:
This explosion of information technology, when combined with an unusual confluence of dramatic — and ongoing — news events, has led many people to conclude that they have given their lives over to a news obsession. They find themselves taking breaks at work every 15 minutes to check the latest updates, and at the end of the day, taking laptops to bed. Then they pad through darkened homes in the predawn to check on the Asian markets.
Sociologist Eric Klinenberg is asked to weigh in on this trend…
ERIC KLINENBERG, a sociology professor at New York University, said people are unusually transfixed by news of the day because the economic crisis in particular seems to reach into every corner of their lives. Usually, he added, people can compartmentalize their lives into different spheres of activity, such as work, family and leisure. But now, “those spheres are collapsing into each other.”
And the news is not just consequential, but whipsaw-volatile. Financial markets swing hundreds of points within an hour; poll numbers shift. This means that news these days has an unbelievably short shelf life, news addicts said. If you haven’t checked the headlines in the last half-hour, the world may already have changed.
And commentary from a psychologist…
For others, information serves as social currency. Crises, like soap operas or sports teams, can provide a serial drama for people to talk about and bond over, said Kenneth J. Gergen, a senior research psychologist at Swarthmore College who studies technology and culture. “It gives us the stuff that keeps the community together,” he said. And for those whose social circles think of knowledge as power, having the latest information can also enhance status, Dr. Gergen said. “If you can just say what somebody said yesterday, that doesn’t do the trick,” he said.
Read the full story.
Science Daily News reports on a new national study from two sociologists out of Brigham Young University which concluded that religious involvement makes teenagers half as likely to use marijuana. The findings from the study are available in the October volume of the Journal of Drug Issues – allegedly settling a question scholars have traditionally disagreed upon.
“Some may think this is an obvious finding, but research and expert opinion on this issue have not been consistent,” said BYU sociology professor Stephen Bahr and an author on the study. “After we accounted for family and peer characteristics, and regardless of denomination, there was an independent effect that those who were religious were less likely to do drugs, even when their friends were users.”
The study, co-authored by BYU sociologist John Hoffmann, also found individual religiosity buffered peer pressure for cigarette smoking and heavy drinking.
What is it about religiousity?
The term religiosity as used in the study has to do with people’s participation in a religion and not the particular denomination. Hoffmann said the protective effect of church and spirituality supplements the influence of parents.
“Parents shouldn’t force it, but they can encourage spirituality and religion in their families, which in itself becomes a positive influence in their children’s lives,” Hoffmann said.
Live Science reported yesterday on the endangered middle class during this time of economic crisis and promises from the presidential candidates do address those struggling on ‘Main Street.’ Live Science frames this problem in the following way: “Already, real income (which adjusts for inflation) has been stagnant since the 1970s, straining middle-class budgets and pushing wealth and power into the hands of the very few. Now some economists and sociologists fear the current crisis could make it all even more inequitable, putting the American Dream, the inspirational foundation of the middle class, at risk.”
A sociologist weighs in on the elements of the American Dream under the most serious strain…
“The major reason I think the middle class is threatened is because most of the things we describe as revolving around the American Dream — owning a house in a good neighborhood and sending your children to good schools, owning and paying for a car or two, and saving money for retirement — all of that depends on having steady jobs with incomes that rise,” said Kevin Leicht, a sociologist at the University of Iowa. “People are supposed to accumulate … a lot of debt when they’re young and gradually pay it off as they age, and go less and less into debt.”
Another sociologist contributes…
The current middle-class concept, which is linked with “middle income” and the associated comfortable lifestyle, came into popular usage after World War II for various reasons, including an increase in education, prosperity and white-collar jobs, said sociologist Teresa Sullivan, provost and executive vice president for academic affairs at the University of Michigan. With the ballooning middle-class, the so-called working class of blue-collar workers shrank. “For the most part, [the middle class] has grown pretty substantially in terms of the number of people who have moved into what might be called the middle of the income distribution,” Sullivan said, referring to the post World War II period.
Read the full story.
The New York Times reports this morning on the concern among New Yorkers about whether crime will return to the city ‘with a vengeance’ as the economy continues to falter. The Times contends, “Expert opinions differ, but the question is hardly illogical. The last time stocks on Wall Street fell hard, in 1987, crime was exploding, and the city saw historic highs in murders in the following years.”
And the Times calls in a sociologist…
“Every recession since the late ’50s has been associated with an increase in crime and, in particular, property crime and robbery, which would be most responsive to changes in economic conditions,” said Richard Rosenfeld, a sociologist at the University of Missouri-St. Louis. Typically, he said, “there is a year lag between the economic change and crime rates.”
The Times adds…
New York, of course, has over the last 15 years seen an extraordinary drop in crime, from the most serious to the mildly irritating. But across all those years, economists and sociologists have debated how much of the success was attributable to new trends in policing and how much to other factors, including a robust economy.
Read the full story.
The Christian Science Monitor reported this morning on the enduring signs of US power despite the economic crisis. Many people seem panicked about America’s status as a superpower, so the Monitor investigated scholarly opinions as to whether ‘the American century’ is over.
Sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein brings his take to this coverage…
Still, what seems clear is that the experience of the Bush years, now drawing to a close amid the worst economic calamity in eight decades, have bolstered those who long predicted a clipped American eagle. “What George Bush did was turn a slow decline into a precipitous one,” says the noted Yale University sociologist Immanuel Wallerstein, who has been predicting the end of the American empire since the 1980s.
“We’ve had two standout factors: the Iraq war, which not only demonstrated but actually accelerated this decline in power, and then the way this president put the American government in such deep debt,” Mr. Wallerstein says. “What we see playing out before us is the culmination of these actions.”
The Monitor concludes….
But for the moment, it’s the financial crisis that is providing a gauge of America’s enduring leadership capacity. With many economists citing international coordination as key to righting the global economic ship, one test will come Friday when finance ministers of the world’s seven major economies meet in Washington.
Eleanor Clift of Newsweek, has recently written about how vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin is reigniting the culture war as her ‘everywoman’ act plays well with audiences. She suggests that this might indicate that the GOP will try to once again paint Barack Obama as an elitist.
In her article Clift included commentary from sociologist Todd Gitlin, who spoke at a Pew Forum discussion in Washington as to whether the cultural war will have an impact come November…
, a professor of journalism and sociology at Columbia University, speaking from the progressive side, said the culture war always matters, but that it may not be decisive, with economic issues making it harder for Republicans to get traction on lampooning as an elitist, in the way they turned John Kerry into a windsurfing Frenchman. Gitlin described the presidential election as a “quadrennial plebiscite of who we are,” with Americans casting their vote for the candidate that best embodies who we are as a nation.
Newsweek’s commentary on the vice-presidential candidates in this culture war…
Nobody wants to be an elitist. In politics, it’s a deadly label. What we saw in Thursday night’s debate were two competing strains of populism. Biden, the Irish-Catholic kid from Scranton, represents Main Street populism, the people against the powerful, anti-corporatism, little guy kitchen-table values. Palin is wooing the same working-class constituency that could decide the election in battleground states like Ohio and Pennsylvania with her pro-gun, family and religious down-to-earth values.
Read more here.
Yesterday the Virginian-Pilot ran a story about the potentially negative consequences of workplace diversity training. A 2005 study from the Society for Human Resource Management concluded that about two-thirds of companies engage in diversity training, but that most of these efforts backfire, resulting in a more homogeneous workforce. The source of the trouble appears to be that most sessions are mandatory rather than voluntary, and focus solely on the legal dangers and not on the benefits of diversity in business settings.
Call in the sociologists to break down the problem…
“They force their workers and managers to sit through this training, and they hit them in the head with the possible legal sanctions,” said one of the researchers, Alexandra Kalev, an assistant sociology professor at the University of Arizona.
Kalev and Frank Dobbin, a sociology professor at Harvard University, reviewed the types of diversity training programs and the composition of the work force at the companies. They found that optional sessions are more likely to lead to increased numbers of women and minorities in the workplace.
That’s because mandatory sessions might trigger resentment and unintentionally “activate biases,” Kalev said. When they’re voluntary, she said, employees are more likely to search for the positives to justify the use of their time.
A better idea….
Too many diversity training programs, [Kalev] said, are designed as “a ticket out of jail” – a way to bolster a company’s defense if it faces discrimination suits. Too often, [she] said, the sessions concentrate on legal minefields. “You have to behave this way,” she said, “otherwise we will get sued and we’ll have bad publicity.” That also turns off employees. “The legal content is so boring and so intimidating,” she said, “and it’s usually exaggerated.”
Better, she said, to focus on how diversity helps them achieve their strategic goals.
This morning MSNBC ran a story on new research from San Francisco State sociologists, which suggests that when women receive a breast cancer diagnosis, they often assume a caretaking role in their own treatment and recovery.
MSNBC reports:
After conducting a series of interviews with 164 breast cancer survivors over two years, researchers from San Francisco State University found that women with cancer not only shoulder the emotional burden of disclosing their diagnosis to loved ones, they often end up being supportive of others at a time when they actually need support themselves.
“There’s been a lot of research on how women are emotional managers, how they take care of others,” says medical sociologist and lead researcher Dr. Grace Yoo, who recently presented the findings at the annual meeting of the American Sociological Association. “And when they’re diagnosed with breast cancer they’re still doing that. They’re worried about how others might react.”
Read the full story.
