Photo by Torsten Mangner, Flickr CC
Photo by Torsten Mangner, Flickr CC

Scientific and technological innovations have given humans a number of new methods to manage fertility and create families. One of the more recent advances in this area is the controversial birth of a child with genetic material from three parents, rather than two. Social scientists find that while these new technologies have helped countless individuals grow their families, their use and availability often reproduce class and gender inequalities. 

Families have always come in forms other than that of the Cleaver’s. Many parents have children from more than one partner. Other families have same-sex parents, single parents, or are childless, whether voluntarily or involuntarily. Invitrofertilization (IVF) and surrogacy are options for some women who have trouble conceiving, but the procedures are very expensive and not as easily available for people across socioeconomic lines. As a result, research finds that the framing of infertility as an individual issue rather than one related to structural constraints places stigma on childless women.
These conditions have created an exploding market for new reproductive technologies. The science of freezing eggs and sperm has resulted in egg and sperm banks where people can donate sex cells for compensation. Although both an egg and a sperm are required to create an embryo, the recruitment and marketing for these services is different for men than women. Women are more likely to be recruited to provide an “altruistic service” and donate their eggs to infertile women; the staff at egg banks have been found to capitalize on cultural norms of motherhood to construct egg donation as a gift exchange. As a result, there are far more women than men participating in this kind of service, even though it is much less physically invasive for men.

Katherine M. Johnson and Richard M. Simon. 2012. “Women’s Attitudes Toward Biomedical Technology for Infertility: The Case for Technological Salience.” Gender and Society 26(2): 261-289.

Lauren Jade Martin. 2010. “Anticipating Infertility: Egg Freezing, Genetic Preservation, and Risk. Gender and Society 24(4): 526-545.

Rene Almeling. 2007. “Selling Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in Genetic Material.” American Sociological Review 72(3) 319-340.

Nasty Woman Tote Bag
Nasty Woman Tote Bag

Donald Trump’s “nasty woman” comment during the third presidential debate has ignited a veritable “nasty woman economy.” Just two weeks later, there are numerous hashtags and a growing diversity of merchandise, including a tote bag, that reclaim “nasty woman” as a positive and empowering label. Elizabeth Warren capitalized on this at a recent Clinton rally when she said, “nasty women are tough, nasty women are smart, and nasty women vote.” As The Atlantic details in their feminist history of the word, “nasty” was reappropriated as a “badge of honor” some time ago, and they point to songs like Janet Jackson’s Nasty as an example of women using the word in a positive way. The reappropriation of stigmatized labels is not new, though social scientists find that this strategy has both strengths and weaknesses.

Psychologists have found that when a group reclaims a derogatory label, perceptions of that group’s power increases. And once a group is perceived as powerful, individuals feel more empowered to self identify with that reappropriated label. However, this strategy only works for derogatory terms like “queer” and “bitch,” not for descriptive terms like “woman” or majority-group terms like “straight.”
Some sociologists argue that this power is merely a “false power.” The fact that terms like “bitch” are still sometimes used as derogatory terms, often by the very people who claim to be reappropriating them for good, leads some to the conclusion that reclaiming terms in this way only hides oppression by making it acceptable and keeping the term alive in the lexicon. Scholars like Mariam Frasier also point out that class, race, and gender inequality shapes if and when someone can identify with a reappropriated label.
This contested and often flexible nature of reappropriated labels is what others see as their strength. Generational and political differences often result in conflicts surrounding reappropriation of a term. These debates have been found among many groups, including feminists, atheists, and African Americans. But some social scientists argue that these negotiations and disagreements give members of stigmatized social groups the agency to evaluate their own labels and to make determinations about when and whether to accept or reject them on their own terms.
Photo by niteprowl3r, Flickr CC
Photo by niteprowl3r, Flickr CC

In 1990, the popular rock music scene was in total disarray — not a single rock album topped the charts. By January of 1992, Nirvana’s Nevermind surpassed Michael Jackson’s Dangerous to the top spot of the Billboard 200, transforming the state of rock music forever and defining the 90s teen generation. On its recent 25th anniversary, the album remains one of the highest selling rock albums of all time, and is thought to represent not only a shift in music, but in commercial entertainment as well.

Sociologist Ryan Moore notes that the rise of Nirvana and other “grunge” bands demonstrated to major music labels that notions of anti-corporatism, rebellion, and authenticity could be co-opted into a larger marketing campaign to sell a variety of products to youth. Bands like Nirvana were so successful because they personified a collective feeling in the 1990s and once advertisers and marketers capitalized on this notion, expressions of deviance permeated mainstream culture.
Why did bands like Nirvana resonate so well with teenagers during the 1990s? Musical tastes can serve as a form of identity construction and the exclusivity of a collective of people, and Nirvana’s image of rebellion was a resource for youth to distinguish themselves from other generations. Although grunge developed originally as an avant-garde or experimental genre, once it seeped into the local music scene of Seattle and evolved into its industry form, it was already well established in the collective identity of youth in the United States.  
Why do albums like Nevermind still resonate in the modern day? Research shows that people tend to view their memories from adolescence as especially important. At the same time, representations of major events or famous people change or develop with each new generation. Abraham Lincoln, for example, was commemorated as a “self-made man” in the years following emancipation; yet, in the rise of the civil rights movement, newer generations viewed him as the “Great Emancipator.”  Thus, we can expect Nirvana’s significance to be much different for teens today than in the early 1990s.
Photo by Edward Kimmel, Flickr CC
Photo by Edward Kimmel, Flickr CC

Protests broke out throughout Tulsa, Oklahoma the night an unarmed black man, Terence Crutcher, was shot and killed by a white female police officer, Betty Shelby. Police killings have surged in mainstream media since the 2014 shooting deaths of young black men like Michael Brown and Eric Garner, shootings that have overwhelmingly involved male law enforcement officials. As a result, female police officers and the likelihood that they will use unnecessary force have largely been excluded from the conversation.

Findings in this area, however, are mixed. Some report that there are no significant differences between use of force by men and women when making arrests, except for the fact that use of force encounters for women were slightly less likely to employ a weapon and produce injury. Others, however, noted that female police officers are less likely to use force and suggest that a greater female presence may reduce violent interactions with citizens.
The last several decades have witnessed a rise in female officers in law enforcement agencies. Consequently, social scientists have addressed the gendered assumptions about women’s competence in handling tasks traditionally considered masculine. Institutional norms in policing often require a great deal of “emotional labor” that differ based on an officer’s gender. Women officers are expected to display little outward signs of emotion in their interactions with citizens, and yet are commonly still assigned policing tasks that tend to be devalued as feminized and judged as appropriate for women officers, such as administrative duties and community policing. 
Some research suggests that female officers are more likely to be victimized themselves. One study finds that female police officers are not at an increased risk of experiencing victimization during police-citizen interactions, but that incidents involving interpersonal violence along with alcohol and/or drugs increases risks for women on the job.
2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil. Photo by paulisson miura, Flickr CC
2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil. Photo by paulisson miura, Flickr CC

Done and dusted. Brazil’s run of hosting global sporting events has officially ended. From the opening game of the FIFA Confederation Cup in 2013, to the closing ceremony of the Paralympics on September 18, it has been quite a ride. Spectacles of the grandest of scales were to be portrayed on television with mostly smiles and laughs, but also some sadness. In the eyes of the world, Brazil’s sporting exploits look to be a success, but was it worth it?  Was the estimated $30 billion the Brazilian government spent hosting these events a good investment? It is probably too early to say for sure, but sociological research can give us a sense of what kind of analyses need to be done to find out. 

In the past, economic growth has often been seen as the primary reason for hosting major sporting events for developing nations. But when even economists acknowledge that little economic revenue will be produced, we must look to other rationales. The hope of breaking into the upper-echelon of nations with positive news coverage and prestige has emerged as one of the justifcations for hosting global sports spectacles today. For example, South Korea, who co-hosted the 2002 World Cup, used the event to promote itself as a modern state, just like its neighbors Japan and China.

Other countries like Brazil, China, and Russia have used their recent Olympic and World Cup events to help build positive public opinion around the globe. Who knows if Brazil’s exploits will make a lasting impact on the world stage, but this criteria will surely be among the most important in how these Games are judged in the future.

Women in Business at the White House. Photo by BusinessForward, Flickr CC
Women in Business at the White House. Photo by BusinessForward, Flickr CC

It’s no secret that the U.S. lags behind many other countries in terms of the number of women in politics. In Congress and state legislatures, women occupy less than a quarter of available positions. Hillary Clinton enters this arena, hoping to be the first female president in the US (but not first in the world: see Mindy Fried’s “Global Women at the Top”). Sexist critiques of Clinton range from criticizing her voice for being too loud, too shrill, and too naggy, to anti-Clinton merchandise that reads, “Don’t be a pussy. Vote for Trump,” or “Hillary sucks but not as hard as Monica.”

While there is some incentive for women to enter male-dominated fields–the pay and status is often greater–there are also negative consequences. Sexual harassment may function as a form of backlash against powerful women who challenge gender norms by entering male-dominated fields or positions. Many women report sexual harassment at work and female supervisors report especially high levels. These consequences occur on a much broader scale, as well. For instance, when women enter occupational fields traditionally dominated by men in large numbers, the average pay for those jobs decreases over time. To explain this phenomenon, scholars point to society’s devaluing of women’s work more generally.
So, what happens when men enter fields traditionally dominated by women? In workplaces where women often outnumber men, such as nursing, men actually advance much faster and to higher positions than their female counterparts. This mechanism is known as “the glass escalator.” Moreover, when men are outnumbered by women in a workplace, they perceive more support from coworkers and supervisors than women who work in male-dominated jobs.

Overall men benefit from working in female-dominated fields, while women face greater burdens when they work in male-dominated fields. It is no surprise that Hillary Clinton is experiencing her fair share of harassment and critique: Not only is she pursuing a position dominated by men, but one that has only been occupied by men.

For more on this, check out our TROTs on female leaders and sexual harassment in law professions, as well as this Soc Images post, “Why Aren’t There More Women in Politics?”

Photo by Peretz Partensky, Flickr CC
Photo by Peretz Partensky, Flickr CC

With police use of force and mass shootings occupying the center of the public’s discourse on public safety, single incident homicides and suicides, which comprise the majority of gun violence, fly relatively under the radar. Social science sheds light on the rates and distribution of gun violence, as well as the most effective strategies to reduce it.  

In 2012, there were over 32,000 deaths by firearms in the United States, which is a significantly higher rate compared to similar countries like Great Britain. Although homicides commitment with firearms are declining overall (though the suicide firearm rate is increasing), the risks for homicide violence vary among demographic groups. In terms of homicide, young African American males and females are at increased risk of firearm homicide compared to other racial groups, but this gap declines with age.
Research shows that targeted gun seizures can lead to reductions in gun crimes. Additionally, background checks, of both those who have criminal records and those deemed “high risk,” are shown to decrease gun violence and arrests. Gun buyback programs – when the government offers to buy privately owned firearms — have been shown to have no effect on gun homicide or suicide rates.
Research also indicates that homicidal gun victimization clusters within small groups that are concentrated in particular neighborhoods. Intervention in these networks has been linked to both reduced shooting behavior, as well as reduced firearm victimization. For example, the Violence Reduction Strategy, pioneered in Boston, is a procedural justice initiative that brings gang members together with community members and law enforcement officials for hour long meetings of focused deterrence.
Photo by Ryan Godfrey, Flickr CC
Photo by Ryan Godfrey, Flickr CC

During a political season in which very little has gone according to script, one thing has been fairly predictable: the demand on all sides for “media objectivity.”

Advocates for objective political reporting are typically referring to journalistic conventions that include using direct quotes, presenting “both” sides of the story, and focusing on the presentation of “material facts.” These facts, we are often told, speak for themselves. But as intuitive and appealing as the call for neutral, unbiased reporting might sound, however, sociologists have been both cautious and critical.

One reason for sociological skepticism is that the notion of objectivity in political journalism is actually a fairly recent historical invention. It has less to do with balance or fairness than it does with ritualized procedures journalists use to protect themselves from the pressures they face in the day-to-day reporting of complex issues. Objectivity, in this sense, emerged as a kind of protective blanket for political journalists.
Not only are the ritualized practices of objectivity in political journalism relatively new, sociologists have shown that they are fraught with problems and limitations. For example, basic standards of media objectivity are typically less consistently applied to female political candidates and candidates of color.
Another strand of sociological scholarship suggests that most standards of objectivity are strongly linked to social context, personal experiences, and the types of conversations that people have with their peers. In other words, journalists and media organizations tend to define objectivity in relation to their target audience and frame their coverage to appease this group. This approach suggests that although MSNBC and Fox News typify the seemingly bifurcated nature of political journalism in the United States, they epitomize two sides of the same coin and may represent the “new normal” in political journalism.
Sequim Bay Late afternoon at Sequim Bay, Washington (as seen from the Jamestown S'Klallam Indian Reservation). Photo by Jan Tik, Flickr CC
Late afternoon at Sequim Bay, Washington (as seen from the Jamestown S’Klallam Indian Reservation). Photo by Jan Tik, Flickr CC

Today some cities are celebrating Indigenous People’s Day in an attempt to counter the celebration of Columbus’ arrival in the Americas that led to years of disease, death, and the removal of native peoples from their homes. One thing to reflect on is how this turbulent past has had lasting health effects for Native Americans. According to the Indian Health Service (IHS), Native Americans and Alaskan Natives have a lower life expectancy than any other US racial group and they are more likely to die from heart disease, cirrhosis, and suicide.

Social science researchers point to a number of social and historical factors that help explain the high suicide rates for Native Americans, including racial discrimination, a long history of colonial exploitation, poor health outcomes, and poor communities. Many of these communities also lack access to quality reproductive healthcare, a disparity that researchers associate with high rates of c-sections among Native American women giving birth.
Poor health outcomes are also closely related to environmental injustice. The remote areas of land originally chosen for Native American reservations tended to be lands that were least attractive to White Americans, but perfect for military testing. The US military used adjoining lands and sometimes seized reservation lands to test military equipment, leaving toxic and dangerous materials in close proximity to Native American land. Native Americans living in areas with high levels of pollution attribute various health problems in their communities to pollutants, but are often unable to validate their concerns through institutional channels.

 

The new anti-bullying emoji.
The new anti-bullying emoji.

Fans of the movie Mean Girls will vividly recall the scenes when Regina George’s friends banish her from the lunch table for wearing sweatpants and when she distributes the hurtful pages of the “Burn Book” through the halls of the school. Other movies such as Heathers, Carrie, and Dazed and Confused portray how kids at school can be cruel. However, there are some new measures being taken to curb bullying, both in person and online. A new app aimed to help bullied students find a friendly place to sit in the cafeteria has launched just in time for National Bullying Prevention Month. And there is also a new emoji you can use when you witness bullying online. 

It is estimated that over 3 million, or 30%, of middle and high school students experience bullying each year.  Not surprisingly, Nansel and colleagues find that poor relationships with classmates and loneliness are associated with being bullied. Research from Miller shows that much of what teen girls call “drama” is actually bullying, although they tend to understand it as a regular part of life rather than bullying.  Girls’ bullying behavior is more likely to involve spreading sexual rumors, slut-shaming, and dishing out homophobic labels and is less likely to involve physical violence.
Who gets bullied is tied closely to status in the social hierarchy, but not in a way most people expect. Faris and Felmlee find that youth with higher statuses and more network ties, the popular kids, are more likely to face bullying; that is, until they reach the very top of the social pyramid where they find a sort of immunity to bullying.  Rather than the popular mean girl picking on the nerd, bullying is more likely to happen within friend groups, particularly online. Attacks online may happen more frequently between friends or former friends because of competition around romantic partners.