Search results for inequality

I read Naomi’s Wolf’s book The Beauty Myth when it was first published in 1991. As an undergrad growing into my own version of a third-wave feminist identity in beauty-centric southern California, her words rang so true. If knowledge is power, then I and other feminists were certain that soon the tide would turn — girls and women would stop buying into this myth, stop buying magazines that promoted body-loathing, and we would rebel against unrealistic and unhealthy social norms.

Sadly, it’s 18 years later, and her message still resonates with undergrad women (and men) today. As a professor, I had the privilege of meeting Naomi when she came to speak at my campus, California Lutheran University, to present “The Beauty Myth.” As you watch this clip of her new DVD, I encourage you to ask yourself (1) How many girls and women do I know who believe in this myth? (2) Which corporations are profiting from their misery?, and (3) What am I doing to reject the myth and help others reject it?

Personally, I think make-up/hair products/push-up bras are okay as long as you don’t feel like you cannot leave the house without them — costumes can be fun as long as you love and accept yourself when you are ‘un-costumed.’  Eating healthy and moderate exercise are good goals, as long as your self-image and self-worth are not defined by your weight/size. For this post, I won’t weigh in on cosmetic surgery…that’s a whole post unto itself. But, as the mom of a 5-year-old daughter, I make sure to never criticize my appearance in front of her (though, I’m still working on not being critical in my own head), and I aim to de-emphasize physical beauty as a value in my interactions with her. Here’s wishing that Wolf’s The Beauty Myth will strike future generations of college students as truly mythical – outdated, outlandish, and out of touch with their generation…

Adina’s book, Damaged Goods?  Women Living with Incurable Sexually Transmitted Diseases came out in 2008.  You can see an earlier post of hers, about sexually transmitted disease and stigma, here.

——————————

Adina Nack is an associate professor of Sociology at California Lutheran University specializing in medical sociology with a focus on gender inequality and sexual health.  You can visit Adina online here.  We are pleased to feature a post she wrote for us reflecting on a talk by Naomi Wolf, author of The Beauty Myth.

If you would like to write a post for Sociological Images, please see our Guidelines for Guest Bloggers.

In Ditmas Park, Brooklyn, they are dedicated to the development of a multicultural population.

multiculturalprogram_sign

Two points:

First, as Angry Asian Man asks, why is the Asian child in a rice paddy hat?  This anachronistic representation reminds me of what we do to American Indians all the time.

Second, the sign reminds me of the pitfalls of using euphemisms. What do they really mean when they say “multicultural”? They probably actually mean multiracial, but they don’t want to use a word with such harsh connotations (in the U.S.).  So instead they use the word culture because it sounds nice and is often imagined to be restricted to things like language, food, clothes, and dancing (as opposed to inequality, oppression, and exploitation).

If they actually meant multicultural, then maybe the hat actually kind of makes sense!  But I think they mean multiracial. In which case, see point #1.

Via Racialicious.

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO SOCIOLOGICAL IMAGES!

Sociological Images is two years old this month.  In July of 2007, we had a whopping total of three (3) posts.

We have great fun with the blog and feel very lucky to have such passionate and intelligent readers.  Thank you all for reading, commenting, and submitting images!


FROM THE ARCHIVES:

While in Oklahoma this summer, Gwen and I saw a swastika design built into a brick chimney.  It reminded us of Wendy’s fascinating post on the history of the swastika symbol from June 2008.  Before WWII, it didn’t signify oppressive racist ideology at all.  The post features pictures of swastika jewelry, a swastika quilt, and more.


NEWLY ENRICHED POSTS (Look for what’s NEW!):

Race and Inequality

We updated our post about race and toxic release facilities by adding some maps showing high-poverty areas and air pollution in Toronto.

Racialicious had an interesting post about Microsoft’s Natal game initially having trouble recognizing people with “dark skin,” which we added to our post about Nikon’s blink-recognition software problems.


Sex and Sexual Orientation

Another zoo reports a pair of gay penguins raising a chick.  We added it to our post on gay animals.

A poster affixed to a tree outside my house was another excellent example of heteronormativity and the social construction of the family.  I added it to a previous example (featuring elephants!).

Christine B. sent us some images of sexualized animals used in Orangina ads, which we added to our earlier post about their insane commercial.

Joyous A. sent us a link to a photograph that we just had to add to our post on ejaculation imagery.


Doin’ Good

Also in boobs,we added another example of breast cancer marketing, this time a breast cancer-themed limousine sent in by Steve W., to our post on the topic.

We also added an anti-smoking advertisement threatening women with unattractiveness to a similar anti-drinking advertisement.


Hot Stuff

We added another example of the objectification of men to our post on the topic (NSFW). In this example a mascara wand involves a man who loses his clothes. Thanks to Jennifer C. for sending us the link!

Fiona D. sent in a Belfast Telegraph story on the Lingerie Football League that apparently warranted a slide show with fifty-nine (59) photos. We added some to our post asking “What warrants a slide show?” (scroll down).

Tiffani sent us an ad in which a woman with her head in a clothes washer is used to advertise a credit union in Georgia. See it here.

We also added a billboard, sent in by Sharon G., using sex with women to sell kitchen remodeling.  See it here, among our other examples of sex being used to sell homes and house stuff.

And Sarah N. sent us another example of women’s “curves” being used to sell products. We added it to our post on the topic here.

Taylor S. sent us another example of a boob-themed product and we added it to our products-shaped-like-boobs post.

Toban B. sent us a link to these two images illustrating the global spread of Starbucks and McDonalds (put together by Princeton):

captureaa

captureaaa

UPDATE: Toban offered these great insights in the comment thread:

When I sent this in, I was looking at the images as indicators of who is and isn’t part of certain aspects of ‘globalization.’

While there has been increased homogenization, some people also have exaggerated the extent to which we all are part of One world (which some people call a “global village” — a term that I find downright ridiculous, to be frank.) I think that people talk like the world is all One because they are ignoring most of the world — i.e. the spots on the above maps that don’t have many coloured dots on them. Obviously the ‘North’ ‘Western’ areas also are very different in some respects (e.g. linguistically), but there’s more consistency in those areas of the world in terms of McDonaldization, digitization, and other features of the ‘North’ ‘Western’ ends of ‘globalization’ — that is, the sides of ‘globalization’ that people tend to highlight (whereas people don’t pay much attention to international waste trade dumping grounds, for instance).

If the world is all One, it is One in a way that entails different positions (e.g. as producers vs. consumers), and a lot of inequality (e.g. in terms of where the money is). If (for instance) Columbia is part of some sort of globalization, the place of Latin America is a lot different from France (for instance).

—————————

Lisa Wade is a professor of sociology at Occidental College. You can follow her on Twitter and Facebook.

Cross-posted at PolicyMic.

I recently came across two really fascinating figures.  The United States has a system of “progressive taxation.”  This means that the richer you are, the more you pay in taxes.  This first figure, found at The American Prospect, shows the percentage of total income earned by Americans (split up into quintiles) and the tax rates for each group.   The poorest quintile, then, pays 4.3 percent of their income to the government, but only makes 3.9 percent of all income dollars each year.  In contrast, the richest quintile brings home 55.7 percent of all income dollars each year, and pays 25.9 percent of that in taxes.

6a00d83451c45669e20115701ba37e970b-500wi

Ezra Klein writes:

When you look at percentage of total tax liabilities, the rich do in fact bear a heavier burden. But it’s because they have so much more money. They are not bearing a heavier burden as a percentage of their incomes. They’re bearing it in relation to everyone else’s incomes… People hear that the top 20 percent pay almost 70 percent of the country’s income taxes and nod their head. That’s unfair! But it mainly seems unfair because people don’t know the top 20 percent accounts for almost 60 percent of the national income.

This second figure (from Matthew Yglesias via Thick Culture) illustrates increasing income inequality.  It compares the average after-tax income for each  quintile, and then the top 1 percent, in 1979 and 2006.  During that time, the poorest fifth saw their incomes increase 11 percent, the middle fifth saw their income increase by 21 percent, and the richest fifth saw their income increase by 87 percent.  Check out the percent increase for the top one percent!

cbpptable-thumb-500x356

(For more great illustrations of income inequality in the U.S., see here, here, and here; for a comparison of income inequality in the U.S. and elsewhere, see here.)

What does fair look like?

Is this kind of income inequality fair?  Is it fair to take a higher proportion of taxes from richer people?  Should we be taking even more from the rich?  Should we be taking less from any group?

Does it matter where the money is going?  I have to admit, I was feeling a little crappy about taxes when we were spending billions of dollars on war, but now that we need to kick start the economy and deal with our debt, I feel fine about them.

Has the economic crisis affected your opinions on (progressive) taxation?  How?

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

I came across this great photo at BAGnews NOTES, entitled, “Reflecting on the Meltdown”:
85742709MT009_Protesters_De

The author describes the photo and its meaning this way:

It captures a two-day anti-capitalist rally protesting the Wall Street bailout. Through the use of reflection (in this photo of a restaurant, as well as this one playing the street off against a corporate lobby), Mario [Mario Tama, Getty Photographer] portrays America’s class schism (note the guy in the lime-colored reflective vest overlapped with the guy in the jacket with the wristwatch); America flip-flopping between awareness and denial; and the strange disconnect these days between crisis and ‘business as usual.

This is a wonderfully telling picture, but perhaps in addition to “America flip-flopping between awareness and denial,” one could also interpret the artistic use of reflection as representative of the ever-widening chasm between the social classes in the United States – one that will most likely not be remedied or even addressed in the near future.

I happened upon a list of figures that display lots of information about who majors in science and engineering (S&E), all available at the NSF page on Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering. All are for institutions in the U.S. only, as far as I can tell.

Here we see the number of bachelor’s degrees in S&E and non-S&E fields, by sex:

figc-12

Percent of S&E and non-S&E bachelor’s degrees earned by racial minorities:

figc-21

Number of doctoral degrees earned by sex:

figf-1

Percent of female workers in selected occupations in 2007:

figh-1

Percent of S&E Ph.D.-holding employees at 4-year colleges and universities that are women:

figh-3

Notice that while women are pretty well represented among “full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty,” they make up barely 15% of “full-time full professors with children,” “married full-time full professors,” and “full-time full professors at research institutions.” Some of this may be a matter of time, in that because being promoted to full professor takes years, an increase in the number of women getting Ph.D.s in a particular field will take a while to show up as a similar increase in number of women as professors in that field, everything else being equal.

But everything else isn’t equal. Women, even highly-educated ones, still do the majority of childcare and housework, and are more likely than men to consider how potential jobs could conflict with future family responsibilities when they are deciding what type of career to choose. So the lower proportion of female full professors at research institutions is likely a combination of some old-school unfriendliness to women in some departments, but also of women opting out of those positions–that is, deciding that the time and energy required to get tenure in a science/engineering department at a research school would conflict too much with family life, so they pursue other career options (for instance, women make up a higher proportion of faculty at community colleges, which are often perceived as being easier to get tenure at, since you don’t necessarily have to do lots of publishing–though anyone who has ever taught 5 courses a semester may question the assumption that it takes less time and work to teach than to publish).

And of course some women try to combine a tenure-track job with their family responsibilities and find it difficult, and either leave academia voluntarily or are turned down for tenure because they have not published enough or are not see as adequately involved and committed. Because of inequalities in the family, men are less likely to face those situations, though certainly some do.

I wish the report had a graph for non-S&E faculty, although it might just depress me.

UPDATE: Commenter Sarah says,

Check out the report “Women in Science: Career Processes and Outcomes” by Yu Xie and Kimberlee A. Shauman.  They find no evidence to support the hypothesis that women are under-represented at the tenure level due to a lag between getting PhDs and acquiring tenure track positions.  In the life sciences, women have been getting PhDs at the same rate as men for many years now, but inequality persists at the tenure-track level.  Xie and Shauman find that a variety of  social factors are responsible for actively hindering women at the highest levels of academia.

As former a sexual health educator and current sexuality studies professor, I meet students whose ideas about sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) have been shaped by the ‘scary slideshow’: that series of full-color, close-up shots of the worst infections.

(Not safe for work–explicit images of STDs)

more...