Just over a year ago, the UK was rocked by five days of rioting and looting that spanned across London and forty-six other local areas. Denouncing the violence as evidence of uncontrolled mobs, Prime Minister David Cameron and Tory politicians declared an “all-out war on gangs and gang culture.” Yet the prevailing stereotype of chaotic, irrationally violent gangs has meant that the ensuing government policies have largely failed. Some have even backfired.

In this recent research (Social Problems, September 2012), Oxford’s James Densley outlines the real operation of gang violence. Examining gang recruitment in London, Densley argues that gangs actually place a premium on a potential recruit’s established reputation for using effective, yet “disciplined violence.” By recruiting talented but discerning fighters, a gang increases its own collective reputation for violence, thus limiting the actual amount of violence in which its members will need to engage. Fear over fists, if you will. Furthermore, Densley refers to instances in which gangs have actually “taken out” their members with reputations for indiscriminate violence—these unpredictable members were more of a liability than an asset to the group.

A far cry from the image of riotous youth, the portrait that Densley paints of the “ideal” gang recruit most closely hews to “The Wire’s” Stringer Bell, who ran his gang’s meetings with Roberts’ Rules of Order, than the “feral underclass” that politicians and pundits love to villainize.

The 1990s saw the rise of multi-party elections in Africa, as well as an increase in election monitoring by international organizations. The goal of such monitoring is to assess and document whether the election process is free and fair, so it’s expected that monitoring should promote peace and increase respect of the electoral process by all parties. Surprising recent evidence, however, suggests fraudulent elections are more likely to lead to violence when they are monitored by international observers.

Ursula Daxecker (Journal of Peace Research, July 2012) analyzes 189 African elections from 1997 to 2009 and accounts for contributing factors, such as pre-election violence, stability, and economic development. In cases in which there was election fraud, Daxecker finds that international observations may actually incite violence, rather than providing a stabilizing force. Essentially, the credible documentation of fraud publicizes illegitimate tactics and may serve as a rallying point for violent unrest and mobilization.

While international peace and democracy advocates assume increased transparency and media coverage is positive, Daxecker’s findings suggest increased attention can be problematic. In cases of fraudulent elections, documenting the truth comes with unintended consequences.

Many contemporary reality shows focus on bodies that are “extreme” in one way or another. In a recent article, Laura Backstrom (Sociological Forum, September 2012) takes a closer look at a pair of these shows, finding that the presentations vary greatly based on conceptions of disability, responsibility, and identity.

Backstrom compares “Little People, Big World,” a reality show that follows a family in which the parents and one son are dwarfs, to “Ruby,” an eponymous show that chronicles the life of one obese woman. Both shows focus on the challenges posed by living with an abnormal body size, but in vastly different ways. In “Little People, Big World,” dealing with dwarfism is constructed as an identity project—encouraging bodily acceptance and a positive social identity. Additionally, the show attempts to de-stigmatize dwarfism and bring attention to the various ways that the world is “not built for little people.” Ruby’s challenges, on the other hand, are constructed as a body project—focusing on weight loss as the primary path to happiness. In contrast to the notion that the world should adapt to little people’s needs, there is no mention the world needing to be modified to fit Ruby’s body. Instead, the focus is on how Ruby’s body prevents her from participating fully in social life.

Backstrom finds that “Little People” follows the principles of the disability rights movement: little people are shown being encouraged to accept themselves as they are, exhibit a positive identity, and participate fully in the social world. Ruby’s obesity, however, is not a condition that fits into the disability rights model. Her  size is portrayed as a roadblock to a positive identity (and as an obstacle she can remove rather than accept). The solution to obesity in shows like these, Backstrom concludes, is always body modification, never de-stigmatization or acceptance of the obese body.

With all the benefits drinking water is said to provide—healthy skin, better digestion, more energy, weight loss, and more—it isn’t surprising that there are few places where people are not constantly sipping water. In the most recent issue of Body & Society, Kane Race provides some much needed context by asking how we got so obsessed with hydration.

Through detailed analysis of the global marketing of bottled water, Race shows companies have shifted our understanding of water as a basic resource to a personal health responsibility. Race finds companies have drawn on exercise science (not the medical or nutrition fields) and applied the conclusions of research on high performance athletes to the general population. Because, hey, even if we can’t perform like high-level athletes, we should drink like them!

The language of fluid replacement was soon mixed with disparate types of expertise to create an authoritative—and highly technical—explanation of the need to be hyper-hydrated. Perhaps most impressive, water companies, operating as medical experts, have established the counter-intuitive claim that thirst itself is not a reliable measure of when the body needs water.

Thanks to Race’s work, it is possible to see how successful advertising campaigns from companies such as Evian and Perrier and groups like the International Bottled Water Association have shaped our very experience of something as basic as drinking water. And he helps us understand how we reached such a precarious position: according to websites like Danone Waters’ Hydration4Health (for “health professionals” and the “general public“), we’re all just a few sips from dehydrated ruin.

Privileged moms like Victoria Beckham and Tori Spelling, with four cesareans each, have given rise to the idea that some women are “too posh to push,” scheduling their births instead.

Not so, say Louise Marie Roth and Megan Henley (Social Problems, May 2012), who examined data from 3.7 million U.S. births in 2006.  At first pass, higher levels of education appeared to be associated with greater odds of cesarean birth. But once race, age, pregnancy characteristics (pre-term birth, multiples, low birth weight, etc.), and complications of labor and delivery were taken into account, white women with greater privilege were shown to be the least likely to have surgical births. Other studies have shown that highly educated white women also choose home birth more than any other group.

Roth and Henley suggest class and race play a big role in the quality of medical care women receive. C-sections, which now make up one-third of all U.S. births, are associated with increased maternal deaths and other post-surgical complications. Minority women of lower socioeconomic status are more likely to have cesareans for less urgent reasons, suggesting that what looks like “posh” medical treatment on the surface might actually be a sign of low quality maternity care. Apparently, with privilege comes the ability to exercise more control in the delivery room and avoid, rather than choose, surgical delivery.

While the pains of eviction have been felt broadly across the U.S. in recent years, Matthew Desmond (American Journal of of Sociology, August 2012) shows that women in poor, predominantly African American neighborhoods have taken the hardest hit.

Analyzing Milwaukee County records from 2003 to 2007, Desmond found that, even before the recession, half of all evictions occurred in predominantly black, impoverished, inner-city neighborhoods. Women in these neighborhoods were disproportionately affected: they accounted for just 9.6% of Milwaukee’s total population, but 30% of all evictions.

Based on surveys and ethnographic research, Desmond argues that both structural factors (falling incomes relative to rising housing costs) and gendered responses in the face of impending eviction (for example, women may try to reach out to personal networks for help, but these personal networks may offer fewer resources) contribute to black women’s disproportionate eviction rates.

Even so, from the start, women in these neighborhoods face an unequal risk for eviction simply because they are more likely to sign rental agreements: criminal convictions increasingly bar African American men from the rental process. Eviction and conviction are, thus, intertwined forces that restrict housing options for African Americans.

The basketball court, like other sporting venues, is supposed to be a place for meritocratic values: success is determined not by skin, but by skill. In a recent journal article (Ethnic & Racial Studies, June 2012), however, Kathleen S. Yep contends that race continues to matter in elite-level sports, even if prevailing beliefs suggest otherwise.

Implementing historical data analysis and in-depth qualitative interviews with former non-white “barnstorming circuit” basketball players, Yep argues that media portrayals of today’s non-white NBA players largely echo those from the 1930s. One possible example is the trifecta of Demarcus Cousins (portrayed as the hotheaded and volatile black threat), John Wall (the skilled and coachable black hero), and Jeremy Lin (the hard-working Asian American novelty act). While all joined the NBA in 2010, the words used to describe them are remarkably similar to those used 70+ years ago for teams such as the Harlem Globetrotters (the black threat), the Bearded Aces (the white hero), and the Hong Wah Kues (Asian American novelty act). Though some black players, like Wall, are now elevated to hero status because of their superb skill and work ethic, not all non-white players are viewed as quite as deserving. Such disparities, Yep insists, are a sign of the contradictions inherent in a sporting world that pushes the rhetoric of liberal multiculturalism while still relying on discourses of white supremacy.

Sports are making plenty of headlines this year, so we were caught by this experiment that assesses how newspaper readers evaluate the validity of reporting based on the race and gender of the reporter. Turns out readers are more likely to trust while males in nearly all sports categories, except for gymnastics (a traditionally female sport). Football provided one surprise: the authors expected this sport, with its predominantly African American players, to correlate with favorable ratings for black reporters, but again, white males were the most trusted scribes.

School counselors take note: the effects of a breakup can be more detrimental to teens than we may think. In this recent Criminology piece, Matthew Larson and Gary Sweeten (August 2012) offer another angle on the effects of teenage broken hearts. Using National Longitudinal Study of Youth data, Larson and Sweeten find that a romantic breakup is directly related to a range of negative outcomes. Young men (aged 12-16) who experience a breakup show an increase in criminal offending and substance use, while young women go straight for the substances, particularly in the form of binge-drinking.

Digging a bit deeper, the authors believe the loss of love results in the loss of relationships, which may lead to negative behavior—ideas stemming from classical criminological strain and informal social control theories. The gender difference, speculate the authors, may derive from a tendency for young women to resort to coping strategies that are more likely to be damaging to themselves, not to others.

One final caveat? Larson and Sweeten find that the negative criminal effects of breakups can be alleviated by one thing: entering a new relationship. Oh, to be young and in (and out of and in again) love.

More and more couples are answering the question, “How did you meet?” with a single word: “online.”

Using a nationally representative survey, Michael J. Rosenfeld and Reuben J. Thomas show in the American Sociological Review (June 2012) that the odds are shrinking for U.S. singles to get fixed up by friends or meet that special someone at the water cooler. Instead, more and more adults are meeting over the Internet—especially middle-aged heterosexuals and all of those seeking a same-sex partner, two groups that traditionally face “thin” dating markets. In fact, in 2008 and 2009, more than 60% of same-sex couples met online, whether through dating websites, chatting, playing online games, or social networking sites, the authors find. And for all groups, relationships begun online were just as robust as those struck up face-to-face.

Simply having web access at home increases a person’s chance of being partnered, according to the study. To launch a relationship, the most important hookup might just be to the Internet.