# data[].attributes.headline
Kindergarten as Academic Boot Camp ( 446–460)

# data[].attributes.subject
Kindergarten as Academic Boot Camp ( 446–460)

# data[].attributes.body
Gracey argues that kindergarten functions less as a nurturing play environment and more as a “boot camp” that rigorously socializes young children into the “student role,” instilling obedience, routine, and deference to authority in preparation for lifelong participation in large scale institutions  .

—-

Drawing on Durkheim’s notion that education “methodically socializes” youth, Gracey observes that kindergarten’s hidden curriculum rules about lining up, raising hands, and completing desk work prioritizes conformity over creativity. The “student role” encompasses behaviors (quiet attention, punctuality, compliance) that mirror later workplace expectations. Gracey likens the structured environment bells signaling transitions, uniform seating charts, and regimented schedules to military training. Just as recruits learn through drills and penalties, kindergartners experience reward/punishment systems (gold stars vs. time‐out) that teach them to subordinate personal impulse to institutional routines. While the overt curriculum focuses on basic literacy and numeracy, Gracey emphasizes the hidden curriculum’s role in shaping social skills: waiting one’s turn, respecting the teacher’s authority, and viewing peers as competitors for resources (e.g., limited toys). He shows how these implicit lessons reinforce hierarchies and behavioral norms indispensable to complex organizations. Observations indicate that larger class sizes intensify the need for strict rules. In Edith Kerr’s class of 25, Gracey notes the teacher’s reliance on rote chants (“Eyes on me!”), hand‐raising protocols, and seating assignments as vital tools to manage scale tools less necessary in smaller, more flexible settings. Gracey warns that early inculcation of passive student behaviors predisposes children to accept hierarchical structures throughout schooling and into the workforce. The boot camp analogy underscores that schooling socializes not just for academic learning but for roles in bureaucratic and corporate settings.

—

Gracey’s “Academic Boot Camp” portrayal of kindergarten reframes early education as a crucial stage in the production of dutiful, rule abiding participants in large scale institutions. By spotlighting the hidden curriculum’s emphasis on obedience, routine, and deference, he challenges romantic notions of kindergarten as child centered play and calls for critical reflection on how socialization practices solidify institutional power from the very start of formal schooling.

# data[].attributes.headline
Hunt, "Police Records of Ordinary Force," pages 470 to 480.

# data[].attributes.subject
Hunt, "Police Records of Ordinary Force," pages 470 to 480.

# data[].attributes.body
Alan Hunt examines how police officers justify routine uses of force framed as necessary, controlled, and normative revealing how professional culture, legal frameworks, and organizational pressures shape definitions of “acceptable” violence.

—-

Definitional Work. Hunt explores, through officer interviews, the distinctions officers draw between "legitimate" use of force and "excessive" brutality, often invoking such factors as threats, suspect resistance, or self-defense. Legal and Training Context. Police use use-of-force continuums and legal statutes to define their actions. But the leeway provided by vague guidelines leads to extensive individual interpretation, thus developing varying points of view on what is "reasonable." Cultural Narratives. Police culture cultivates a value system emphasizing toughness and solidarity; the retelling of "war stories" normalizes the use of aggression. Those who question such dominant values can face ostracism by peers, thus promoting an "us-versus-them" mentality. Accountability Gaps. Hunt demonstrates that official review and public accountability processes often corroborate the explanations offered by officers, thereby creating a feedback process in which the routine use of force is rarely questioned. Institutional factors, including union protection and the solidarity represented by the "thin blue line," insulate officers from discipline.

—

Hunt's research clarifies that routine policing entails contested moral efforts to set the boundaries on the use of force. To achieve lasting change, it is necessary to make training more transparent, institutionalize judicial oversight, and initiate cultural changes within departments to redefine what is "normal" policing.

# data[].attributes.headline
Zimbardo's "The Pathology of Imprisonment" pages 315 to 321.

# data[].attributes.subject
Zimbardo's "The Pathology of Imprisonment" pages 315 to 321.

# data[].attributes.body
Philip Zimbardo's experiment at Stanford illustrates how institutional roles and situational pressure can quickly create abusive and depersonalizing actions among "guards," while inducing trauma among "prisoners" as a reaction. This highlights the power of the environment in creating deviance.

—-

Experimental Design. Zimbardo recruited systematically male college undergraduates for the experiment and placed them in roles as guards or inmates in the simulated prison. Within days, the guards became authoritarian in their behavior, whereas the inmates showed symptoms of helplessness and elevated tension. Role Internalization. Guards internalized the roles given to them, reporting to duty in uniforms and sunglasses, and instituting punitive systems. Participants described sensations of real power; the inmates, in contrast, endured demeaning treatment and were deprived of their identity, demonstrating the speed with which normal individuals can internalize the traits of an enacted role. Situational vs. Dispositional. Zimbardo argues against malevolent behavior being dispositional, assuming that situational and structural factors, such as uniforms, isolation, and lack of supervision, brought about abusive behavior in place of individual personality traits. Ethical and Institutional Critique. The quick onset of cruelty caused immediate ethical concerns, leading to the early ending of the experiment.

—-

"The Pathology of Imprisonment" delineates how situational pressures can overwhelm personal ethics and produce institutional abuse. The text calls for institutional reform like oversight, responsibility, and personnel rotation to minimize the circumstances conducive to deviance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Henslin, "Eating Your Friends Is the Hardest," (pp. 277).

# data[].attributes.subject
Henslin, "Eating Your Friends Is the Hardest," (pp. 277).

# data[].attributes.body
Richard Henslin utilizes the extreme act of cannibalism performed among the members of the Donner Party to show how situational factors and group solidarity can blur moral boundaries. Thus, he shows how the idea that deviance is relational, and not absolute, works.

—-

Historical Context. The Donner Party, stranded in the Sierra Nevada during winters of 1846-1847, turned to cannibalism. Henslin painstakingly documents diaries and accounts from surviving members of the party to show how group pressure and hunger pushed individuals, who normally are considered "civilized," to violate universal moral taboos. Moral Relativism and Labeling. Universal stigmatization of cannibalism made the act an accepted option for the distressed group. Henslin explains the shift through labeling theory: while the act is seen as monstrous outside the group, it became seen as an unfortunate imperative in the group's enclosed space.

Group Solidarity. Consistent with Durkheim's theory of mechanical solidarity, Henslin argues that common experience of hardship, in addition to group decision, created a moral order where the use of comrades' bodies for cannibalism became justifiable as an act of loyalty and necessity of survival. Implications for Deviance Theory. This episode illustrates the socially relative character of deviance; behavior deemed deviant under one set of conditions may, under extraordinary conditions, become redefined. In addition, it highlights the critical importance of power and narrative to the deviance labeling process.

—-

Henslin's description of the cannibalism of the Donner Party serves to highlight the point that morals are socially produced and are dependent upon certain situations. During times of intense pressure, moral codes can invert, hence demonstrating that deviance categories are neither universal nor static, but are negotiated in localized environments.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB page 243: "The Aspirations and Fantasies Surrounding a Wedding Ceremony"

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB page 243: "The Aspirations and Fantasies Surrounding a Wedding Ceremony"

# data[].attributes.body
The “Wedding Dreams” activity on page 243 invites individuals to engage in reflective consideration of how cultural expectations of marriage powerfully shape and affect their own fantasies. This is frequently marked by a focus on lavishness and seeking the approval of others, and it underscores the social expectations that may be brought to bear. It also introduces the intrinsic tensions between a person’s own wishes and the collective expectations exerted by society.

—-

Fantasy vs. Reality. The creative exercise of fantasizing about having a lavish and extravagant wedding ceremony complete with luxurious venues and designer wear serves as a powerful indicator of just how deeply one has imbibed the ideals of the white wedding, as well as the influences of media sources that represent such ceremonies: creating a link between a sense of wealth and success and the ideals of personal commitment and public standing. Social Comparison. This activity specifically highlights the influence of witnessing the wedding ceremony of others within one's peer group, in that it can spark a chain of competitive comparisons where guests subliminally compare one celebration with another thereby fueling an endless quest for what is envisioned as the “perfect” celebration in an effort to avoid any judgment or jealousy on the part of other witnesses. Cultural Expectations. The general cultural milieu, specifically in cultures like those of the Middle East where there is strong pressure to perform large and expensive celebrations, places additional pressure on the couple: these expensive weddings represent family honor and their reputation within the larger community, while smaller ceremonies can be read as signs of stinginess or an inability to show respect to current customs and the expectations of society. Personal Agency. This discussion finally returns to highlighting the crucial need for couples to achieve a measured balance between societal and cultural pressure and their own personal sense of what is most important to them making conscious choices as to whether to acquiesce to such demands, to resist them, or even redefine what they envision as an authentically meaningful wedding experience.

—-

“Wedding Dreams” reveals the intriguing idea of weddings as lively sites of cultural performance, in which aspects of identity, social status, and a sense of belonging intersect in a significant manner. Through the process of comprehending and recognizing the complex social scripts that are being performed within these ceremonies, couples are empowered to shape and craft ceremonies that actually reflect their real values and convictions, instead of simply submitting to outside pressures and expectations from society.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB Chapter 8: "A Thorough Examination of the Theme of White Weddings, the Marriage Institution, and Intricate Family Dynamics"

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB Chapter 8: "A Thorough Examination of the Theme of White Weddings, the Marriage Institution, and Intricate Family Dynamics"

# data[].attributes.body
Johnston, Cairns, and Baumann present the case that the “white wedding” phenomenon which is characteristically marked by its iconic white dress, a ceremonial ritual taking place in a church, and a lavish reception serves to act as a hegemonic ritual. This ritual is important in normalizing and reinforcing heteronormative marriage and the conventional nuclear family formation. This observation remains true irrespective of the historical background from where this practice evolves and the social restrictions that are inherently linked with various social classes.

—-

Historical Roots. The modern white wedding has its roots in the wedding of Queen Victoria in the year 1840, where she wore a beautiful white wedding dress that came to represent purity and innocence in the marriage context. This choice of wedding dress created a durable template for weddings that the Victorian middle classes were quick to follow in their own weddings, attempting to capture some of the glamour and decorum of royalty. As the style spread, it was diffused throughout the world via colonial and media channels and has since become a key indicator of what constitutes "proper" marriage across a wide range of cultures worldwide.

Ritual and Ideology. The white wedding ritual itself contains important messages and underlying themes about gender roles in society: depicting the bride as an innocent, pure, and submissive woman, and describing the groom as a strong protector and provider who assumes responsibility for taking care of his partner. The wedding industry's marketing strategies help to further reinforce and perpetuate these traditional roles, packaging elaborate and expensive ceremonies as positively necessary rites of passage that people need to undertake when entering adult heterosexual life. Class and Consumerism. Event planners, wedding sites, and other vendors actively market and encourage increasingly high levels of spending totaling over $30,000 on average in the United States alone thus favoring the interests of those from middle and upper class backgrounds while, at the same time, excluding working class couples. This process ultimately works to reproduce social stratification, all under the auspices of granting individual choice and freedom. Globalization and Resistance. While many non Western cultures have adopted and incorporated the ubiquitous white wedding conventions, local variations persist and flourish for instance, in India, one may routinely observe a white wedding dress beautifully complemented by vibrant red trim. Meanwhile, some couples are actively resisting these traditional expectations by eloping, wearing non white gowns, or opting for secular ceremonies as ways to subvert and challenge the dominant normative expectations surrounding weddings.

—-

Though the white wedding is often presented as a timeless and traditional emblem of marriage, it is in fact a relatively recent invention with a largely Western provenance. Such a notion serves to occlude and cover over the broad diversity of various forms that marriage might take globally. By giving less significance to consumerism surrounding wedding ceremonies and instead adopting a wider variety of family forms, we might successfully counter the ideological hegemony of the white wedding. This would also open up space for more equal and inclusive practices that accommodate the diversity of human relationships.

# data[].attributes.headline
Miller "Women in the Military," pages 518 to 534

# data[].attributes.subject
Miller "Women in the Military," pages 518 to 534

# data[].attributes.body
Laura Miller explores the intractable and contradictory place that women have in the military ranks of the U.S. On the one hand, they are celebrated as necessary assets to the force in terms of requisite manpower and critical diversity. On the other hand, there is a widespread assumption that women represent potential liabilities to military cohesion and established tradition. This underlying tension is only partly a reflection of the entrenched dynamics involved but also uncovers a deep layer of institutional sexism veiled by a meritocracy fiction most frequently presented.

—-

Miller offers a thorough analysis of how military culture is rooted in such masculine values of physical might, emotional restraint, and heterosexuality. These ingrained values make it more complex to integrate women into the military culture. Women in this environment face numerous challenges such as suspicion by their comrades, sexual harassment, and constant observation of their actions and capabilities. If they succeed in their duties, they are distrusted in case their success is seen to bring about charges of unfairness; but if they fail, they serve to be cited against women in arguments about their incompatibility with military service. Soldiers are often hostile to women soldiers when they view them as disruptive to a sense of male unity or brotherhood in a military setting. They fear such women would be involved in affairs and would be prone to giving "special favors" so that this would distort team dynamics. But these concerns tend to ignore systemic obstacles faced by women such as discriminatory access to training, rampant double standards against them, and exclusionary barriers to participation in front line positions a situation only recently beginning to break. Miller also explores the idea of "gender camouflage," demonstrating how women are forced to suppress their femininity in order to fit in and be part of a very masculine culture while at the same time judging them for failing to be "feminine." Members of the LGBTQ+ community who serve in the military face even greater obstacles, especially in restrictive policies such as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Despite such daunting obstacles, many women serve with exemplary quality and work hard to break past stereotypes and reform the institution in a positive direction so that future generations will benefit.

—-

Miller states that a full integration of women in military services requires not just a policy shift, but a dramatic realignment of the existing cultural attitudes. Recognition and respect for the contributions made by women and conscious breakdown of the ubiquitous perception of the military establishment as a male bastion are necessary and key steps towards ensuring full equity for everyone.

# data[].attributes.headline
Katz "The Importance of Being Beautiful,"npages 341 to 348

# data[].attributes.subject
Katz "The Importance of Being Beautiful,"npages 341 to 348

# data[].attributes.body
Katz presents a strong case that beauty is a powerful and persuasive type of social currency in contemporary society, especially for women. This idea of beauty infiltrates and impacts a broad spectrum of areas, from employment prospects to how individuals are treated in the legal system. Yet, it is critical to understand that this social admiration of beauty is about far more than just aesthetics; it also works to mirror and reveal deep seated underlying systems of power that are gendered and racialized in nature.

—-

The work offers a thorough investigation through a wide range of studies that demonstrate how attractive people are much more likely to be selected for different work assignments, get promoted in their workplaces, and even receive shorter sentences when arrested, especially when this is contrasted with their less attractive counterparts. This effect is most starkly referred to as the “beauty premium,” and it is most acutely felt by women whose very physical appearance is prioritized above other vital qualifications, skills, or certification qualifications they may have. Katz addresses this important problem by shedding a clarifying light on how our cultural apparatus understands beauty to be a privilege granted to a special group of human beings but also a moral good to be aimed for. We are taught to believe beauty is a matter of individual taste; however, we are faced with a rude jolt represented by this stark homogeneity we are confronted with when it comes to what we desire whether these ones are about having a body with a lithe build, a face whose features are perfectly symmetrical to each other, or a complexion without blemishes. These strict paradigms serve to reflect white and Eurocentric beauty paradigms while equally marginalizing those people falling into fatness related categories, disability categories, older age categories, or nonwhite statuses. This is where we have beauty viewed as a form of apparatus enforcing and reinforcing prevalent social orders. On top of this, Katz also addresses psychological impacts brought on by this complex interconnection: women are socialized to engage in acts of self monitoring, judge themselves with undue harshness, and spend time and money in a futile effort to try to meet impossible societal demands. Thus, beauty can be understood in terms of work a labor unpaid but viewed as necessitated socially. Although it is indeed the case that men are undeniably affected by said societal phenomena especially concerning the immense popularity of gyms and grooming culture implications of these standards and their results are much harsher on women in particular in areas demanding visibility such as in the media, in politics, or in law.

—-

Katz ultimately decides that so long as beauty remains such a determining factor regarding whether or not a person is deemed worthy, the ideal of equality will continue to elude us. In order to remedy this problem, a number of cultural changes are necessary; these involve promoting more diverse representation across media, less judgment on the part of society of people's physical appearance, and legal protections against discrimination on the basis of one's appearance. These are all important in terms of altering how we assign value to people in our society.

# data[].attributes.headline
Tannen pages 192 to 198 "But What Do You Mean?"

# data[].attributes.subject
Tannen pages 192 to 198 "But What Do You Mean?"

# data[].attributes.body
Deborah Tannen argues that men and women are most likely to have different conversation styles because they have been socialized in a different way. This difference in approach to conversation is likely to lead to misunderstanding between men and women, but it is essential to recognize that this is not because a particular gender is "better" than another. Rather, it is a matter of cultural norms having imbued in them expectations along a masculine-feminine continuum.

—-

Tannen delineates a total of seven different areas of communication in which men and women most often encounter conflict, largely through their differing underlying assumptions and styles. Apologies, women tend to use apologies to build rapport and establish connection; however, men are likely to view such apologies as a sign of weakness and vulnerability. Criticism, men tend to use a direct approach when criticizing; women tend to soften criticism in a bid to maintain and protect their interpersonal relationships. Thank yous, women tend to offer thanks in a manner of reinforcing connection with people; men may see thanks expressed in this manner as unnecessary or redundant. Fighting for credit men tend to be more assertive and aggressive in demanding credit and recognition for things they have accomplished; women tend to pass credit to other people, in some cases inadvertently harming themselves professionally and obstructing their own recognition. Joking, men tend to rely on teasing and banter as a way of connecting with fellow workers; women tend to use more inclusive jokes and share them with everyone. Complaints, women tend to commiserate and bond through complaining; meanwhile, men tend to try to fix and solve the problem and in so doing may discount the emotional complexity and importance of the situation. Praise and response, women tend to downplay praise in an effort to portray themselves as humble; men are more apt to accept praise openly and without hesitation. The overall point of Tannen is not to assert that one style is superior to another but to highlight how a failure to recognize and appreciate these different types of communication can cause unnecessary and preventable conflict in areas of workplace and personal relationship.

—-

Tannen concludes that to better and strengthen the manner in which we communicate, it takes more than being “clear” in what we say; it essentially needs a sensitivity and knowledge about the different conversational rituals among different people. By promoting understanding between the parties, rather than blaming based on gender stereotypes, we can greatly enhance both workplace collaboration efforts as well as interpersonal relationships in different relationships.

# data[].attributes.headline
Thorne & Luria, “Sexuality and Gender in Children’s Daily Worlds” (pp. 180–191)

# data[].attributes.subject
Thorne & Luria, “Sexuality and Gender in Children’s Daily Worlds” (pp. 180–191)

# data[].attributes.body
Thorne and Luria also argued that youngsters construct their knowledge of gender and sexuality through peer group interaction much earlier than when they reach puberty and thus disprove the popular notion of children being inherently "innocent" or unsullied by such a complex notion. Early enactment and demonstrations of these identities in youth form a strong foundation in suchgendered behaviors that will last a lifetime.

—-

Through extensive ethnographic work conducted in schools at the elementary school level, the authors illustrate the manner in which particular gendered categories are not merely present but are actively performed and re-inscribed in the geography of daily school life. Boys and girls in such contexts tend to constitute largely segregated peer cliques, held in place and enforced through a range of teasing and social boundaries such as the infamous “cooties.” The important point to be noted is that such differences are not natural or innate; rather, they are social emergent phenomena arising out of culture. The playground is shown to be a critical site of gendered power dynamics where game activity, control over physical space, and behavioral expectations work to inscribe traditional gendered roles: boys will take control of large physical space through participation in sports and rough play, while girls are generally enjoined to participate in less vocal, relational activities and to be relegated to the sidelines of such engagements. This politics of space serves to shore up already existing social rankings based on gender. The authors also illustrate how constructs of “romance” and sexuality are taught to children, largely through the vehicle of teasing paired boys and girls in coupling roles, taunting friendships as “crushes,” or excoriating particular types of behaviors as “flirty.” By no means innocent, these joke and interaction repertoires are a pedagogic part of what is taught to children strict heterosexual scripts are taught to them even as stigmas are simultaneously instantiated against any potential deviation on these paths. Any form of queerness is either excluded entirely to the scene or is used in a stigmatizing manner. Adults in these children’s lives tend to have a great deal of responsibility in supporting such constructions through such things as yearbook awards for “cutest couple,” Valentine’s Day-type activities, or the deployment of gendered punishments. The point to be made is important: children are not simply passive receivers of these sets of information; rather, they actively work with such categories in exploring what is to them and for them in negotiating their very own selves; in resisting societal expectations; or in complying with norms put around them.

—-

Thorne and Luria presented the significant argument that childhood cannot be considered a straightforward, neutral developmental stage; instead, it is a formative stage in which individuals start developing their gender and sexual identities. To foster a sense of inclusivity and acceptance, it is necessary for both schools and families to actively re-examine and reshape the environments that unintentionally reinforce and promote binary thinking and heteronormative norms starting this critical process as early as kindergarten.

# data[].attributes.body
Eder, “On Becoming Female” (pp. 173–179)

—-

Debra Eder puts forward the thesis that femininity is not biologically determined or predetermined by nature, but is instead created and constructed through a series of social interactions, media messages, and reinforcement by peers. Through this process, girls learn and internalize some traits like passivity, concern with appearance, and relational dependency, which become entrenched as core characteristics that are linked to womanhood.

—-

Eder is diligent in chronicling a wide range of classroom settings as well as varied social contexts wherein young girls gradually learn to accept and perform behaviors that are “appropriately” feminine as defined by societal expectations and norms. From a very early age, these girls tend to receive frequent praise that is largely centered on their physical appearance and not so much on any significant accomplishments or intellectual efforts they might have achieved being typically praised with adjectives like “nice,” “sweet,” or “pretty,” while qualities like intelligence or assertiveness are all but totally ignored. In the school setting, these girls are confronted with a set of competing demands: they are supposed to be friendly but not too friendly, attractive but not so attractive that they appear to be “trying too hard,” and assertive but not so assertive that they cross over into being labeled bossy or aggressive. A complex network of lunchroom gossip, cliques organized around social ties, and teasing about romance allows girls to police other girls’ behavior and mannerisms in front of an audience. Eder emphasizes the profound influence of several mediums including magazines, Disney movies, and social media websites in shaping a particular conception of femininity: an extremely limited aesthetic ideal typified by thinness, trendy clothing, frequent smiling, and a heterosexual orientation. Girls who do not fit squarely into this mold girls who may be tomboys, queer girls, or simply those who have no interest in boys are often excluded or described negatively. She relates these entrenched social behaviors to a larger patriarchal social structure, where women are rewarded for aligning themselves with societal expectations but punished when they are assertive. These deeply ingrained societal expectations wield a long-term effect over time, creating in girls a sense of limits on their leadership potential, sexual agency, and career goals, which ultimately causes serious distortions in their development and access to opportunities over the course of their entire lives.

—-

According to Eder, it is a complex and multifaceted process of work to redefine femininity and one that requires large-scale cultural change but also individually targeted assistance specifically through measures designed to give girls a vision and capacity to play alternative roles beyond what has conventionally been assigned to them. Teachers, parents, and peers must especially work to counter perpetuating narratives and work to establish supportive environments valuing girls for their intellectual abilities, inner strength, and individuality rather than just their physical appearance.

# data[].attributes.headline
Henslin's "On Becoming Male," specifically pages 161-172.

# data[].attributes.subject
Henslin's "On Becoming Male," specifically pages 161-172.

# data[].attributes.body
James Henslin illustrates that masculinity is not innate but taught through socialization processes from schoolyard games to adult expectations which pressure boys to internalize strength, emotional suppression, and dominance as natural male traits.

—-

Henslin also offers several important and formative stories of his own childhood experience in which he realized what it was really like to be "being a man." As a child, he was repeatedly chastised for openly exhibiting emotions like weeping when he was in pain or humiliated in some way and so he made a connection between emotional vulnerability and weakness. He describes this phenomenon known as the "hidden curriculum" in playground culture in which boys also socialize in cliques to build bonds through a series of competitions. In these social arrangements, they tease each other constantly and also exclude boys who are deemed too effeminate or too sensitive. Here occurs the construction of what it is to be regarded as a man: by physicality, toughness, and aggression. This construction of what it is to be a man is formed in boyhood and carried forward into adulthood in which men tend to move through their social circles by studiously avoiding expressions of their emotions to their friends and also avoid talking about mental health issues. Instead, they concentrate on defining success and playing it tough. Henslin goes on to discuss an idea of "hegemonic masculinity," a social construction of masculinity. This ideal is characterized by a mythical figure of a straight white male jock whose presence is marked by dominance and power such an ideal is in large measure unavailable to most men but remains an aspirational ideal. This idealized form of masculinity is monitored by one's peer group but also enforced by a range of institutions such as sports teams, schools, and the media. These institutions reward a figure of a tough hero while devaluing any form of emotional complexity. Henslin is worried about what this social construction does to women but is also determined to point out how much it damages men: it limits their emotional lives to a very narrow range; it channels them into certain career tracks; and it creates social worlds in which violence becomes routine and defensive strategies are bad for them.

—-

Henslin concludes that masculinity needs to be redefined and envisioned as a diverse and complex set of expressions that are constantly evolving and adapting, instead of being understood as a fixed and static identity. By interrogating and challenging the dominant discourses and expectations of masculinity, we can liberate people of all genders from the oppressive constraints of domination and repression. This can open up possibilities for new modes of relational connection and for developing emotional integrity.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB Chapter 11: An Integrated Study of Different Aspects of the Ideas Encompassing Beauty, Ideology, and Intersectionality

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB Chapter 11: An Integrated Study of Different Aspects of the Ideas Encompassing Beauty, Ideology, and Intersectionality

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 11 makes the case that standards of beauty that we commonly find in society are not simply neutral or subjective aesthetic taste. Rather, they are highly ideological constructions that are inextricably linked to a number of systems, such as those of race, gender, class, and the histories of colonialism. It is these interlocking systems that generate hierarchies that determine conceptions of value and visibility in our cultural world.
—-
The is about the manner in which Eurocentric beauty standards characterized by white skin tones, straight hair, and lean bodies have become a defining feature in constructing the landscapes of popular culture, advertising, and global fashion. This pervasive influence has the effect of further marginalizing bodies whose physical features do not fit into these sanctioned parameters. By utilizing insights drawn from both feminist theory and Black feminist scholarship, the writers clearly demonstrate how such dominant beauty norms are less about aesthetic taste and more about an express reflection of prevailing systems of power based on whiteness, class privilege, and ableism. Herein lies a powerful mechanism of social control: those whose bodies best fit into societal norms are more likely to accrue greater social capital, more employment opportunities, and greater desire ability in terms of love and romance than those bodies that fail to measure up. Additionally, commodification of beauty whether seen in dieting and plastic surgery industries or in selling whiteness in skincare products makes vast sums of money through people's insecurities while simultaneously reinforcing beauty parameters that are impossible to attain for most people.

Subsequently, the chapter unpacks the intricacies of how intersectionality complicates these discussions. A white working class woman, for example, might be attacked for failing to measure up to so called “classy” beauty norms, whereas a Black woman might be either over sexualized or completely disappeared in representation, independent of her grooming and care of herself. The writers contribute a range of case studies about these critical concerns including discussions of colorism in Latin American beauty pageants, ubiquitous fatphobia in the fashion industry, and omissions in representation of trans and disabled bodies by mainstream media. Social media is an interesting phenomenon in this sense: whereas social media platforms such as Instagram make it easy to disseminate these constricting beauty norms through filters and cosmetic influencers who encourage people to conform to beauty norms, social media is also a site for non normative body positivity and decolonial beauty movements to take root and thereby present necessary resistances to such constricting ideals.
—-
The authors then go on to say that challenging beauty ideology needs a collective critique, inclusive representation, and a radical redefinition of worth rooted not in appearance, but in humanity. Intersectional thinking must remain central, or reforms risk replicating the very exclusions they aim to undo

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 7 contends that different toys meant for children have a impacting effect on how one acquires gender identity and thereby contributes in promoting the normalization of different roles assigned to different genders. The toys also work to reinforce and uphold heteronormative views and binary readings of sex and of sexuality and this is achieved at a very early point in the process of children's development.

—-

The book is introduced in a thorough investigation of the toy aisles in large shopping stores with a stark and clearly defined difference between the boys' and girls' sections. While in boys' areas there is a seeming excess of toys celebrating violence, construction, and independence such things as popular Legos, guns made by companies like Nerf, and superhero action figures those in girls' areas are filled with toys celebrating beauty, domesticity, and care with such popular products as Barbies, cook/servant sets, and princess costumes. While these toys might seem to be merely harmless sources of amusement and diversion, they are in actuality powerful instruments of socializing children to accept and internalize societal norms long before they enter puberty. A boy encouraged to play around building and battling is in effect being signaled to go into future aspirations in engineering or sports; a girl encouraged to play through nurturing and self-beautification is in effect being conditioned to work in caregiving jobs or aesthetic labor roles reflective of traditional expectations around gender.

This preliminary investigation serves as a platform for an analysis of market jargon in toy culture terms such as “tough,” “hero,” “pretty,” and “sweet” are well displayed in evidence of advertising strategically linking certain personality traits and future goals with particular genders. Furthermore, aspects of queer histories are inserted into these narratives in very subtle manners: romantic narratives in princess stories serve to confirm heterosexual desire, while this very obvious exclusion of queer affection further reinforces normative assumptions about both genders and sexual orientation. The book continues with a fascinating case study in a preschool in Sweden that was run on a non-gendered model with a very clear intention to break down classic male female binaries; in this pioneering setting, a new model of play was devised with a resultant pleasant array of byproducts in cross-gender empathy development, development in effective communication in children, and cooperative play. The book then goes on to discuss the backlash against this new model: parents and cultural commentators worry about "confusion" supposedly induced by encountering non-gendered toys. This response serves to highlight just how deep rooted in socializing children to accept and internalize stipulated norms apace well before they enter puberty is the toy market and also indeed wider culture.

—-

The authors come to the conclusion that toys are not apolitical; rather, they are ideological tools that reflect and shape society's values and norms. In order to successfully counteract and undo the impact that these toys have on children and their upbringing, it is necessary to encourage critical media literacy, develop inclusive education, and fundamentally reconceptualize the notion of childhood. Such reconceptualization should not view childhood as simply a natural manifestation of gender identity, but as a complicated field in which cultural narratives and scripts are both internalized by children and can potentially be challenged and unlearned throughout the course of time.

# data[].attributes.body
Question 1: What race are you?

Own answer: I am Mexican American,

P1 : ”I’m Black—African American, specifically.”

P2 : “I identify as Chinese American”

P3 : “I consider myself White or Caucasian.”

P4 : ”I describe myself as Arab American, from a Lebanese background.”

P5 : “I’m enrolled as Cherokee Nation member—Native American.”

Question 2: How do you know? How do you make that decision?

Own answer: I decide based on family origin, traditions, and where I was raised.

P1: I know because my family has lived in the South for generations; social history and community recognition affirm my African American identity.

P2: My parents emigrated from Beijing, I speak Mandarin at home, and I check “Asian” on forms—so I’m Chinese American.

P3: My grandparents trace back to Europe, my skin tone matches the “White” category, and society treats me as white.

P4: My parents speak Arabic at home and maintain cultural customs; on paperwork I choose “Middle Eastern or North African.”

P5: I’m enrolled in the tribe, have documented lineage, and participate in Cherokee cultural practices—so I’m Native American.

Question 3: How did you learn what race you are? Early messages?

Own answer: I knew because even though I was born on Texas I was raised in Mexico and my family is Mexican.

P1: In grade school, I learned to check “Black” on forms; my history teacher covered the civil rights movement as my story.

P2: I first realized race when classmates asked if I was “Chinese” because of my eyes; my parents talked about Chinese New Year and culture.

P3: I didn’t think much until diversity workshops in college pointed out I was part of the dominant White group.

P4: I was teased for my name “Hassan,” so I learned early that I was perceived as Arab; at home we discussed Middle Eastern heritage.

P5: Tribal elders held ceremonies; I learned in childhood that being Cherokee is both legal status and cultural identity.

Question 4: How do you decide what race other people are? Examples?

Own answer: By skin tone, surname, accent, and cultural cues but I know this can be misleading.

P1: I look at skin shade and hair texture if someone is dark skinned with Afro hair, I assume they’re Black, though not always correctly.

P2: I note facial features common in East Asia (epicanthic fold), or if they speak with an accent, I guess they’re Asian.

P3: I assume people with very light skin and no discernible accent are white.

P4: I listen for Arabic names or hear “Salam” in greeting, then I think Arab; but I’ve been wrong when they were Muslim but South Asian.

P5: I look for tribal tattoos, indigenous jewelry, or ask “Are you Native?” if someone mentions reservation can be intrusive but common.

Question 5: How do other people decide what race you are? Examples?

Own answer: by now I look and talk.

P1: Strangers assume I’m Black when they see my dark skin and style; sometimes ask if I play basketball.

P2: People call me “Ni hao” or ask if I know martial arts because I look Asian.

P3: I’m treated as part of the majority; few question my whiteness so people assume I’m strait laced and mainstream.

P4: Co‐workers hear my name and accent and ask if I’m from the Middle East, sometimes follow up with political questions.

P5: Neighbors ask if I’m “one of the Indians” or assume I live on a reservation when they see tribal regalia at pow‐wows.

1B Race is a way society groups people based on physical traits like skin color, but it’s not based on biology.

2B To say race is socially constructed means that society creates the meaning and importance of racial categories. These ideas change over time and across cultures, and they’re used to justify power differences and inequality.

# data[].attributes.headline
“The Racist Mind" by Ezekiel, pages 369 to 375,

# data[].attributes.subject
“The Racist Mind" by Ezekiel, pages 369 to 375,

# data[].attributes.body
Steven Ezekiel poses the thesis that the reality of racism remains and persists not only in the form of overt hate and hostility but also in the existence of cognitive structures called “color-blind racism.” Such structures justify and legitimize social disparity by applying standards that pretend to be neutral or objective in nature, including meritocracy and the idea of cultural inadequacy.

—-

Ezekiel commences his analysis by tracing meticulously the landscape of overt racist ideologies, like the damaging ideology of scientific racism, to better demonstrate to readers the ways through which these deeply harmful ideas and attitudes were able to persist despite public discreditation. He shows that they later developed and modified themselves into more subtle and treacherous forms that persist in shaping contemporary society. As he progresses through his analysis, Ezekiel comes to identify four discrete color blind frames of racism to reinforce systemic inequality or Abstract Liberalism in this particular frame, the ideology of equal opportunity is invoked at the same time that it resists targeted responses like affirmative action measures that are consciously aimed at overcoming the historic disadvantages of minority populations naturalization, in this frame, segregation comes to be justified as a preference inherent in nature, so that “people like to be with people like them,” and a segregation results as a natural consequence of such preferences; in this specific frame, socio economic inequalities come to be blamed on supposed cultural deficiencies of particular populations, such as the claim “Black families don't value education”; and the minimization of Racism, according to the fourth frame, discrimination no longer poses a particular barrier to success for individuals in the modern world. Ezekiel makes use of very long quotations from interviews in order to transmit in rich firsthand detail the ways in which the different frames appear in common talk he introduces white subjects who speak of their worries about what they call “reverse racism,” attribute societal ailments to the supposed pathology of criminality amongst Black people, or reconfigure the question of the issue of equality as merely the result of individual choices made by individuals. Furthermore, he subjects the institutional practices of these philosophies to the close examination they deserve: critiquing practices of policing that justify themselves in the name of a “color blind” crime control ideology; probing school assignment plans that reenact segregation in the name of neighborhood schooling; and analyzing hiring practices that give preference to “fit” over diversity, and in doing so exclude people of color from the chance to participate in social relations.

—-

Ezekiel makes a strong case that is successful in demonstrating the urgency of confronting and combating racism by initially recognizing these pernicious frames and then revealing the contradictions inherent in them. Anti racist education must go beyond simply calling out overt prejudice; rather, it must go further to confront and dismantle the subtle logics that reproduce inequality in our world. This is done by developing a critical consciousness in people and by ensuring that there is structural accountability, as opposed to individual goodwill alone, as a source of implementing change.

# data[].attributes.headline
Page, “Showing My Color,” pages 360 to 368

# data[].attributes.subject
Page, “Showing My Color,” pages 360 to 368

# data[].attributes.body
In her introspective and very personal essay, Mary Page cogently maintains that racial identity is not something inherent but something that has to be constantly performed and policed in and through bodies, particular gestures, and emotional displays. She points out that she feels obligated to repeatedly “show” her Blackness in ways in accordance with the constantly shifting requirements of others, something that could be erratic and taxing.

—-

The account begins with a scene that provides a backdrop for the introduction of a white colleague who delivers a backhanded compliment, stating that she is "so articulate for a Black woman." This innocuous-sounding compliment doubles as a micro-insult and neatly discloses the widespread and ingrained assumption of a supposed speechlessness of Black people. The text then seamlessly segues to a procession of childhood memories in which her hair was touched inappropriately by passersby and teachers alike, and discloses the disquieting fact that Black hair is too often relegated to the status of something otherwise available to public perusal and interaction. Each of her personal stories discloses the fraught double bind in which she finds herself situated: on the one hand, if she elects to downplay her markers of race—such as by smoothing out her hair and speaking in what counts as "normal" English—she risks the charge of alienating her own people; on the other hand, if she expresses her Black style and self in a genuine manner, she runs the danger of being characterized as "angry" or "aggressive."

—-

Page finds reference to Erving Goffman’s dramaturgical metaphor to explain her lived reality: she finds that she moves between different performances designed for different audiences, acutely aware that any misstep in the high-wire act of navigating the double bind will result in her being reclassified. When that occurs, in such instances, she may be infantilized and seen as a "childlike" Black woman, or alternatively, she will be demonized and seen as "threatening." Shemovingly discloses the ways in which social scripts differ according to the intended audience before whom the performances take place: at sites of academic conference, there is a fierce pressure to stifle her use of the Southern Black accent, but when participating in family gatherings, she has to labor to authenticate the same accent. This emotional labor expressed in smiling, reining in her anger, and code-switching becomes a routine burden that takes a high toll on her ability to be herself and inhabit her race in all her glory. Furthermore, Page relates these elaborate performances to broader structures: diversity training sessions in the corporate world that merely token her presence, media reductions of her race to simplistic stereotypes, and police practices of irresponsibly identifying Black bodies as inherently menacing and dangerous.

—-

Page concludes that liberation requires both structural change and personal reclamation: dismantling the scripts that force performance, cultivating spaces where racial range is accepted, and honoring the messy, multifaceted reality of identity beyond rigid signifiers.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB Chapter 12: A discussion of music, racism, and cultural appropriation: Multiple intersections occurring in the modern world

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB Chapter 12: A discussion of music, racism, and cultural appropriation: Multiple intersections occurring in the modern world

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 12 explores the complex processes by which popular music genres that emerged from Black communities have been subject to commodification, expropriation, and redefinition by white artists and a range of industries. This process has created considerable profit for a limited group of individuals and institutions, while also masking the profound cultural roots from which this art form grew. In addition, these processes help to reinforce long-standing racial disparities that continue to exist within the music industry and beyond.

—-

The chapter begins with a dynamic examination of the development of jazz and blues in the vibrant decade of the 1920s. Throughout the decade, it was largely Black innovators who were responsible for the creation and development of these powerful forms of music. Yet it was the recording companies that were primarily responsible for promoting what were called “race records” to racially segregated audiences who were sharply delineated by race. As the music began to crossover into the broader cultures—witness Louis Armstrong’s appearance on white radios and Elvis Presley’s reign on national music charts—the deep Black foundations of the music were often glossed over or sanitized to fit the tastes of white middle-class sensibilities. The rise of rock ’n’ roll in the 1950s provides a perfect case in point; white youths were clamoring to purchase records by artists such as Bill Haley and Elvis Presley, while Black artists like Chuck Berry were getting relatively little airplay and lower financial returns in the way of royalties.

This same trend of history continues to repeat in the development of hip-hop: originally the grassroots development of Black and Latino youth, it has become a multibillion-dollar market largely controlled by predominantly white corporate honchos. Those honchos filter the styles of hip-hop they choose to promote while policing what they consider to be “authentic” at the same time. The chapter treats a number of case studies, including Madonna’s cross-genre collaboration in the genre of rap, Iggy Azalea’s career controversies, and Beyoncé’s iconic “Lemonade.” From these examples, it demonstrates the ways in which cultural appropriation becomes something at times understood as dialogic and at times understood as exploitative, and in the intermix of the two comes the complexity of influences.

Some of the key concepts explored in the conversation include “intertextual borrowing,” a legitimate means of artistic exchange, and the concept of “cultural theft,” characterized by extractive processes without adequate acknowledgment or economic retribution to the original authors. Also criticized in the chapter is the role of intellectual property law, in that while the law tends to focus the protection of the music’s melody and words, it often neglects the control of style, dance moves, or innovative linguistic patterns. This neglect allows the corporations to control the financial streams of the business while the artists get shortchanged in the way of residuals for the work they create.

—-

The authors argue for reparative strategies: fair-use exceptions that guarantee credit and revenue sharing; community-based archives to document origins; and industry reforms that put artists—and especially artists of color—at the center of decision-making. Recognizing the political economy of music is essential to redress past wrongs and shape more equitable futures.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB Chapter 6: Sports and Race  (pp. 164–169)

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB Chapter 6: Sports and Race  (pp. 164–169)

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 6 makes the case that organized sports in the United States reflect and reproduce the broader social race hierarchies. Simultaneously, these sports offer rich sites of empowerment and possibility for the black community, but also exist as sites in and through which ongoing racial stereotyping occurs.

—-

The chapter begins with the history of segregation in the early 20th century, which successfully kept Black players out of the mainstream competitive landscape. This exclusion eventually led to the creation of segregated leagues like the Negro Leagues in baseball, not only celebrating and confirming the brilliance of Black players but also demarcating the ubiquitous nature of their exclusion from the larger sporting culture. As the process of integration continued after Jackie Robinson’s historic debut in 1947, sports became a major battle-ground for the struggle of civil rights. Under it, Black players used the high status they held as super stars to confront and defy the racist treatments they received, a campaign perfectly exemplified by Muhammad Ali’s resistance to the Vietnam draft. Yet, it is also imperative to observe that the integration was never without its complexities; it existed alongside ingrained stereotypes that continued to permeate the general public. For example, the Black players were represented as being naturally athletic but at the same time described in ways that denied them the necessity of leadership or toughness of the intellect. This narrative helped to create a justification for the underrepresentation of Blacks in critical roles like the coach position, executive roles in the front offices, and decision making roles in sports organizations.

The chapter highlights the modern-day issues in the sporting landscape, such as the NBA player demographic, largely Black, sharply contrasted with the largely white ownership. It exhaustively disassembles the ways in which media narratives contribute to the perpetuation of what might be called a “racialized hierarchy of positions” in sport, as seen between the roles of the quarterback and the receiver or the point guard and the center, and it represents deep-seated social presuppositions about intelligence and physical ability. Additionally, cross case comparison across the sports of Baseball, Football, and Soccer reveals the ways in which particular dynamic specific to each sport determines the contours of the race of opportunities available. For instance, baseball’s positional specialism has enabled the gradual development of more Black managers over the years but at the glacial rate at which it has been done. Conversely, the quarterback pipeline in football remains white, while the elite soccer academy prefers the individuals who have the resources to travel and get world class training, further tiling the landscape of race in equity in sporting.

—-

The authors come to the conclusion that, while sports have the ability to function as a catalyst for social change providing critical forums for protest and representing model examples of leadership the sports world continues to be significantly impacted and shaped by underlying racial ideologies. Bringing about true equity in this arena will require not just the presence of more integrated rosters that are representative of diverse backgrounds, but far reaching structural reforms in coaching certification procedures, diversity within ownership groups, and how media presents various storylines. These reforms are vital to truly eradicate the more covert manifestations of racial coding that persist within the sports world.

# data[].attributes.headline
“The Persistent and Unrelenting Fight Against Wealth Inequality in America" (video)

# data[].attributes.subject
“The Persistent and Unrelenting Fight Against Wealth Inequality in America" (video)

# data[].attributes.body
The video is a dynamic visualization that graphically brings to life the wealth distribution in a way that powerfully captures and portrays the intricate systemic dynamics so comprehensively detailed by Gans, Morris & Grimes, and Higley. In the process, it renders what are typically abstract and hard-to-grasp statistics into a coherent and instantly understandable narrative that engages the viewer at an intuitive level.

—-

The animation displays, in an exceptionally expressive and thought-provoking way, the harsh and extreme reality that an incredibly high percentage—almost 30 percent of all wealth in the country is possessed by America's most wealthy 1 percent of families. In contrast to this, society's bottom half, at nearly 50 percent in population, possesses an incredibly low percentage of this wealth, at less than 3 percent. This sharp variation in wealth distribution is surprising not only in degree, but also in magnitude, as it is profoundly larger than what most would reasonably guess or hypothesize about how wealth is shared in society. The latent functions, as made clear by Gans, are undoubtedly influential: this high concentration of wealth is a key driver behind society's constant need for low-wage, low-skill job opportunities, while also creating the great financial reserves that are needed to finance society's attempts to remove some effects of poverty. In addition to this, this wealth distribution chart is nearly flat for anyone outside this top decile, mirroring findings as proposed by Morris and Grimes. These explain that without a benefit from inheritance or merely the privilege that results from one's possession of connections within society to affluent communities, it is nearly impossible for people to amass great wealth over a long timeframe. Lastly, this video also effectively explains Higley's theory on elite cohesion by its graphic illustration of the very rich bubble at the top of this economic rung. It also implies that capital is cycled constantly through various structures, such as political donations, private equity investment, and other institutional routes that have as a consequence, effectively maintaining and sustaining advantages based on class position, that reinforce themselves over generations.

—-

By moving wealth shares dynamically, the video is able to translate sociological theory into an accessible as well as call to action that is both urgent and compelling. It is an appeal for us to tackle and challenge the underlying systems that drive educational inequality, tax policy, and campaign finance. The goal is to stem inequality while at the same time growing real opportunities for everyone.

# data[].attributes.headline
Higley, “The U.S. Upper Class” (pp. 395–406)

# data[].attributes.subject
Higley, “The U.S. Upper Class” (pp. 395–406)

# data[].attributes.body
John Higley theorizes that the United States upper class is a consolidated elite group with several factors bringing them together. The elite class not only has institutions that solidify their position but also partakes in certain cultural practices and exerts profound political power. These factors do not exist separately but in unison, functioning synergistically in the perpetual reproduction of wealth and power, something that happens generation after generation.

—-

Strongly rejecting simplistic characterizations of the upper class that depend on single income levels, Higley rather focuses his attention on shedding light on the role played by a range of different markers that act as predictors of elite cohesion within this group. He pins down a range of such key markers, such as attending distinguished elite preparatory schools and Ivy League schools, joining high barrier clubs with exclusory admissions standards, and marrying within elite environments rather than outside them. These authoritative institutions have an active role in creating close-knit network associations that effectively reduce high barriers to high status careers, including high paying fields like finance, lawyering, and executive management. Recruiting within these competitive professions is often initiated by personal introductions and referrals rather than open competition, thus granting a unique privilege to members even within such a network. From a political perspective, the upper class exercises disproportionate influence by virtue of their large political donations; consequently, political agendas are much affected by such donations, as these also fund think tanks and political lobbyists. Such collective action effectively inscribes legislation and regulatory structures in ways that favor accruing capital and insuring assets to existing wealth holders. Culturally, members' common tastes and pursuits such as vacations among luxury hotels, patronage of the fine arts, and other forms of charity serve simultaneously to reinforce a sense of class identity on one side and to signal to others outside this group on the other that they partake in an elite difference, thus further marking off insiders from outsiders.

—-

Higley comes to the conclusion that the reproduction of elites is based squarely on a number of key factors, such as access to institutions, network homogeneity, and cultural capital. All of these factors taken together produce a scenario whereby substantial class fluidity is made extremely improbable, especially in the absence of any transformative policies. These policies could take the form of, public campaign finance, taxing inheritances, and even the expansion of access to elite schools.

# data[].attributes.headline
Morris & Grimes, “Moving Up… Moving On?” (pp. 383–394)

# data[].attributes.subject
Morris & Grimes, “Moving Up… Moving On?” (pp. 383–394)

# data[].attributes.body
Marvin Morris and Kathryn Grimes make an alternative strong case that directly refutes the commonly-held presumption about intergenerational mobility in America. This commonly-held opinion, they opine, conceals the grim reality that there exists a multitude of ingrained structural barriers that severely constrain opportunities for most people, thus locking them into whatever social class they were born into.

—-

By a careful and exhaustive integration of quantitative and qualitative analysis, the authors successfully and persuasively illustrate that educational disparities are society's most powerful and influential gatekeeper, finally determining levels of social mobility: schools in wealthier neighborhoods often pride themselves on having better facilities, esteemed teachers, and available college-preparatory courses, while, unfortunately, poorly funded schools in low-income neighborhoods leave students poorly prepared and poorly funded for success in postsecondary schooling. In addition, theory regarding social capital introduces an added level of stratification to levels of educational opportunity: middle- and upper-class families have at their disposal precious connections that may be tapped—such as mentors, various internship opportunities, and connections through schools—which lower-income families struggle to duplicate or create in like quantities. Moreover, fragmentation in the labor market heightens these dynamics even further: "good" employment—defined by stability and with an accompanying generosity package—now necessitates not only formal educational credentials but also strong personal connections as a requisite qualification for entry, while low-wage labor employment opportunities on offer provide little to no true opportunity for upward mobility. In contrast to this arrangement, policy interventions such as welfare reform and earned income tax credits most often aim at offering immediate, short-term relief without making comprehensive structural reform that would have addressed deeper underlying dynamics at issue, thus failing to satisfactorily resolve or even identify root causes of troubles at issue.

—-

Morris and Grimes argue that, for real mobility to become an actuality, we must make fundamental and systemic investments across a few critical areas. These include making equality-of-opportunity education a priority, creating universal early childhood programs, making college accessible for all, and implementing policies that would erase segregation along lines of economics. It is only through such ambitious efforts that the vision of "moving up" can really reach outside of an elite minority.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gans, “The Uses of Poverty” (pp.376–382)

# data[].attributes.subject
Gans, “The Uses of Poverty” (pp.376–382)

# data[].attributes.body
Herbert Gans puts shows that poverty still exists and remains in society mainly because it serves a range of underlying, or latent, functions. These functions are useful to several segments within the social structure, particularly useful to those who are wealthy as well as to institutional players who function within the societal system. One could say that Gans argues that poverty is not accidental but serves important functions that benefit society with labor supply, job creation, cultural contrast, and political use.

—-

For Gans, poverty is not an incidental byproduct that occurs only as a consequence, as it were, in of setbacks or downturns in business or in the economy. Instead, it is an integral, indispensable part of society's operating mechanism that has a variety of critical functions or "uses" that are indispensable to its functioning. In this first sense, poverty insures a large reserve pool of low-wage labor pivotal to a variety of industries based on cheap labor, such as hospitality, housework, and agriculture. This specific phenomenon serves an indirect but important role in facilitating low levels of costs of production and cheap services in these obviously defined industries. Second, there is a wide range of employment opportunities in a variety of areas, such as social services, police departments, and other allied fields, that are able to tap into resources and acquire legitimacy as they try to confront and manage the manifold needs that stem when people have themselves become poor. In addition, there is a range of cultural roles that emerge from this state of being: the poor effectively serve as a de facto "other" and thus serve as a contrasting alternative by which the middle class is able to differentiate themselves, reaffirm themselves, and consolidate their practices, whereby this solidifies established norms within society. Poverty also plays a role in politics, political leadership will also use the underclass as scapegoats, shift attention from shortcomings in systemic structures, mobilize votes and support for a distinct agenda, and provide rationales for implementing measures that may or may not have an immediate impact on addressing underlying causes of poverty.

—-

Gans finally reaches the crucial conclusion that almost all serious attempts at eradicating poverty must directly address and attempt to alter a host of different structural incentives that reinforce and drive it. The reason behind this conclusion is that poverty has a range of different functions on different levels, including political, institutional, ideological, and economic levels. Hence, for eradicating poverty to succeed, it would require removing deeply rooted vested interests based on this underlying injustice and reforming prevailing frameworks in society. This process is an incredibly disorienting one that is likely to generate strong opposition from individuals and groups with an interest in preserving prevailing arrangements.

# data[].attributes.body
"Fight for $15" is such a powerful condemnation of all those corporate ideals of it being acceptable to be paid nearly nothing and have immense disparities in wealth. What we're seeing is workers who are not earning a living wage organizing and demanding a living wage in place of languishing in all the shady practices of big business. It began as a small protest and quickly became a movement of workers pushing against the idea of low-wage work as inherent to capitalism and something we have to accept as such. The Fight for $15 isn't really about raising the minimum wage it’s really fighting for the rights and respect of workers who have been profiting the owners for far too long. This article really gets into the dirty details of how organizing in the streets brought in the millions of workers and illustrates how low pay most impacts women, people of color, and other marginalized communities. With some harsh statistics and true stories of labor revolts, it highlights the fact that almost half of the American workforce is earning less than $15 an hour, and really gives you a good sense of how those workers are struggling in the economy. The article discusses how the movement really began picking up steam. It highlights the fact as well as the Fight for $15 isn't really calling for wage reform in the present moment in time; it’s a bigger call-out to the entire economic system. By presenting the struggle in economic AND moral terms, the movement shifted the conversation. It began as something small but grew into the hot spot in national conversation on income inequality and the future of work. The gains the movement racked up in cities and states around the country raising wages and increasing labor standards truly illustrates the power of organizing in common cause. Here’s the thing, so this article really gets at a lot of how low wages continue to persist. It flips the story of low wages as a story of competition in the labor market on its head by explaining it’s really a matter of policies and corporations skimping where they can in order to save a buck. And there’s good evidence in there to show us if we raised the minimum wage to $15 many workers would be making more money and yet still lose few jobs. This evidence isn't just disprovening the standard tale of increasing wages; it’s also illustrating just how much difference it’s going to make to make work pay a living wage. Here’s the thing, so the Fight for $15 really matters for larger social transformation, you know? It got loads of people excited in regards to unionizing and organizing and bargaining and coming together as a force, and in particular those people who typically get shut out of those benefits. And it really speaks to how ridiculous it sounds when workers have to decide between a series of bad jobs or risking their health. The tone all throughout this piece is all empowerment it illustrates low-wage workers aren’t just sitting around and letting the economy walk all over them; they’re standing up and taking action and changing their lives by organizing and getting involved in politics. As to real life, the Fight for $15 movement really changes the way we think about economic justice it isn't politics anymore; it is simply a question of doing the right thing. It destroys all those arguments based on keeping wages low and promises another type of society in which we can all live in dignity. Because it involves cooperation and organizing from the bottom up, the concept itself gets us to rethink work and to realize how powerful workers can be when organized in opposition to corporate power.

# data[].attributes.body
This section on corporate ideologies completely dispels those myths people have been perpetuating forever in order to maintain low wages and obscene wealth disparities. It really addresses the concept of success as simply how much you hustle and how smart you are, essentially, this article is completely flipping the script on meritocracy. It’s informing us that all this corporate speak we hear everywhere isn’t really accurate at all; it’s sort of a clever tale to make the bigwigs feel comfortable in their seats. These tales present capitalism as if it’s just the natural order of things where pay gaps are based on how much effort you put in and how intelligent you are. In all honesty, those tales simply divert the attention from the true issues perpetuating inequality. Whenever corporations speak of "earning one’s keep," it simply makes low wages sound as if it’s a natural fact and that workers complaining are just idlers and didn’t work hard enough. Not only does this frame of mind deflect accountability from the bosses and the entire fiscal system but it also ceases workers from uniting and making changes for the better. This entire thing revolves around how all of those ideas get around in all those channels such as corporate messages, how the media spin things, and what the government says and how they all combine in influencing what people really think. By propagating the idea of economic inequality occurring naturally and being a desirable thing too, corporations leave everything in place and make it really difficult for other ideas to penetrate. It also examines how language sustains those beliefs. "Competitive," "merit based," and "self-made" aren't arbitrary adjectives; they carry a ton of heavy ideas in support of the insane gaps in wealth and power everywhere. the conversation just goes on and on and on about how all of this corporate business really messes up our culture and society, right? This whole idea of a meritocracy sort of leads people to only think of themselves and their own individual success, isolating them and less willing to work with others. When people feel like their financial lives are all their own responsibility, they don’t really consider if the system’s balanced or work on creating an equal opportunity for all. This sort of thought process is a major reason why labor movements can't manage to get anywhere at all. It forces you to confront the less-than-amazing reality that authority wants nothing but keep power and they see you only as a number. It gets you questioning all the things people flippantly refer to as "business sense" and "political sense," and whether you can really support an economy based on such injustice. In dissecting how corporate concepts become established, it encourages you to consider why it’s really essential to create another story one examining where inequality is produced and advocating for a greater distribution of opportunity and resources. QIt really does make you question all those stories of getting paid all this money and all those other tales of making a ton of cash and keeping it and really getting rich in this country.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 3: Fast Food/Work and Cash (JCB:)

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 3: Fast Food/Work and Cash (JCB:)

# data[].attributes.body
This part is similar to how fast-food workers really reveal to us what neoliberalism is all about, and the fast food culture as a whole provides us with a good indication of what’s wrong with paid work in those systems. Flipping burgers and fries isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, these fast food jobs really show us how capitalist production really operates and what’s so bad it is in regards to pay. Referencing Marx’s concepts of alienation and exploitation, the chapter goes into how fast food workers fall into this bad habit of dulling and degrading work that benefits the big corporations far more than the workers themselves. One of the major things about the chapter is that if you want to be more productive and make some money in fast food, you sorta have to tone down on your personality and creativity a lot. Employees generally just end up repeating the old and dull things regardless of where they work and people refer to this as “McDonaldization.” This term rose to fame thanks to George Ritzer and it generally refers to everything being the same, very easy to tally and quantify, predictable, and very controlled. So in fast food it’s all about getting every customer the very same food and service regardless of who they are. There's this chapter where they crunch the numbers and it really demonstrates that even if you're working full-time at a fast-food joint, you're barely keeping up. When you consider what people are paid versus what it really costs to live rent, health care, transportation then you can really appreciate just how difficult it is on fast-food workers. They'll often have to work multiple jobs or stress over cash all the time just to get by. This entire money problem isn't arbitrary; it really shows how the system of capitalism operates and squeezes every penny out of workers and places all the burdens of low pay on them. this chapter really all revolves around what actually goes on in fast-food work.  loads of fast-food workers are still barely getting by on really small paychecks despite putting in utterly ridiculous hours and working really, really hard which is utterly infuriating. The book highlights how this entire discussion of meritocracy gets deployed to account for low pay but somehow overlooks the actual problems of job market inequality. What this whole thing really is about is personal responsibility and how everything is a distraction from doing something useful instead, such as a decrease in prices for consumers and more job creation by the super rich or providing workers with greater protections. This chapter goes into how fast food influences our perceptions of consumption and service and also addresses income inequality and workers' rights. And when they discuss wage labor, it’s not only the money they’re concerned with; they’re considering how working in a job where you could be let go at any moment can mess with your head and social life as much as anything else does. This broad perspective really gets you to consider how fast-food work, the essence of our late capitalist society, influences how we perceive work, who we are, and our sense of dignity. So this chapter is making us re-examine what we think of work and wages by highlighting the ridiculous contradictions of working in fast food. It’s arguing that this idea of working really hard and ending up rich is somewhat of an inside joke because capitalism essentially exploits people. This conversation’s making us consider the relationship between workers and bosses and advocating for some reforms so people can get paid better, work in better conditions and have a more equitable economy in general.

# data[].attributes.body
In Wishard's book, wishard puts a nail on the head by explaining the way every generation approaches work in this shifting economy. Rather than dumping everyone into one huge group, he shows the muddled and sometimes convoluted things every generation must navigate in this crazy employment market. What really resonates is that our attitude about work and its significance to us completely hinges on where we sit in the generational lineup. essentially, what he's saying is that it's all about the way technology is evolving and the way people are feeling these days, which is making things kinda unstable. People who do have employment, particularly people wedged somewhere in the middle between the old-fashioned work arrangements and this precarious gig economy, are in a bad place. Older employees have to switch from stable employment to temporary work, and that's really hard for them, it makes them feel unwanted. All the experience and the loyalty they've accumulated for many years does not count for much anymore in an economy that's all about speed, flexibility, and constant new faces. Wishard completely nails it when he describes the way this generation gap plays with identity and social standing. For many, it's not about the money; it's really about the way they perceive themselves and the way people view them too. When older employees have to navigate this incredibly fast changing work environment where their skills and experience aren't being respected the way they should be it's like they're losing everything. “It's not about the money”; really messes with them because it changes the way society looks at them. On the other side, young employees appear so technologically advanced, yet they're really stuck in precarious, lousy paying jobs with little chance for anything better in the future. Their lives aren't really secure, and it's difficult for them to imagine having stability to look forward to. Wishard really makes you realize how generation gaps are so much more than our little things; they really define the way that society thinks. You can really see it when we're switching back and forth between holding on to the old and diving into the new, especially when we're talking about work. The thing about it is, Wishard really makes you wonder what work even is anymore, 'cause the boundaries between work hours and relax hours, and personal life and public life, get really blurred. What he's saying about being stuck in our work is that our economy isn't standing still; it's always evolving and every generation gives it its own interpretation.Wishard got it right when discussing the way the technology is transforming the workplace. Certainly, computer technology and automation can make things easier and present new possibilities, but they also perpetuate the train of inequality. I mean, older people could be struggling to catch up, and younger people could be struggling without the proper support or security. we need to listen to everyone, now matter the age, and work this out together. Additionally, it surely indicates that any solution to the problems we're experiencing in the workplace at the moment needs to address bridging the gap across the different generational groups so we don't leave people who've played the game for many years behind. Caught Between the Ages really reminds us that work is not only about earning money; it's about the people we connect with, it reminds us to realize that the benefits of new technology and flexible work only really benefit certain people, and those gaps really disrupt people's everyday lives wherever they're at.

# data[].attributes.headline
Leidner grabbing a quick meal at McDonald's.

# data[].attributes.subject
Leidner grabbing a quick meal at McDonald's.

# data[].attributes.body
Robin Leidner goes into McDonald’s and takes apart how the whole operation works: how they produce the same atmosphere everywhere no matter where you are. His book isn’t merely the inside book for fast-food management; it really makes you think about how the company’s systems influence not only the food we eat, but also how we act, the things we think about, and even the social mores we get along with. Leidner takes McDonald’s as the prime example of George Ritzer’s “McDonaldization,” which is actually about how things such as efficiency, predictability, and control come to dominate our work lives and society in general. Leidner completely analyzes how McDonald's is able to keep things so consistent for people regardless of where in the world they happen to be. He mentions how each burger is made the same, and each piece of fast food churned out through the power of some real scientific management in the background. This guy says McDonald's makes it happen with vendors approved by the top, machines handling much of the heavy work, and a strict rulebook with checks in it, which ensures things run smoothly like a fine-oiled machine. But instead of praising the system for working so well, Leidner actually asks the real question of who is paying the price for it?. Leidner speaks of how McDonald's employs social vibes and control to remain at the forefront in business. It's not just a matter of workers being robots performing their jobs but about them developing a "manufactured personality" which is only a mechanism for keeping customers extremely satisfied, but it also inhibits workers from being themselves or having any kind of voice at all, god knows that we all know what he is talking about, we all have had to have to do the PR thing to do, even in college I find myself writing stuff I completely disagree with just for a good grade. All these PR moves designed to make things go smoothly end up leaving people less than fully human in the long run. Leidner is getting us to think about the big picture with all these corporate trends. In this efficiency-obsessed world, we're getting the same systems in areas much farther-reaching than fast food. McDonald's atmosphere is everywhere, and it’s as if our experiences and even our very selves are judged by how much we produce and how much we save. That’s raising some big questions about technology and all the bureaucracy we work with nowadays. Is the pursuit of efficiency worth sacrificing spontaneity, creativity, and our very autonomy? And how do these systems impact workers' long-term happiness when they just feel like just one replaceable part in this giant machine?. Leidner completely identifies this strange paradox in the way companies work. The whole system is designed to make things go more smoothly and make more money, yet it actually tends to send workers packing, leaving them miserable, and feeling fairly disconnected. All those rules which keep McDonald's running smoothly can actually destroy creativity and make work physically as well as mentally draining. Leidner makes the question of if the benefits of such a system are equal. On the surface, all of these corporate programs look wonderful and beneficial, but the truth is, they can really infiltrate our daily lives and alter the ways in which we interact with each other, deal with work matters, and even how we think about a "good" job. His work really makes us remember that in attempting to make everything so highly specialized and hyper-efficient in workplaces today, we can actually create real problems for individuals and society as a whole.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed: (A Story of Hard Times in America)

# data[].attributes.subject
Ehrenreich, Nickel and Dimed: (A Story of Hard Times in America)

# data[].attributes.body
Barbara Ehrenreich came to the low wage economy, and came with a realization and that's how broken the whole capitalist system is these days. In her article, she abandons her cushy life as an academic or journalist to demonstrate how the "American Dream" is completely out of reach for most people. One of the best things she did is how she correlates the dream of advancing in life with the bitter reality of just scraping by. By comparing her paycheck with the minimum you have to live, she tells us the bitter truth: no matter how much you're hustling full-time, those checks just barely cover the essentials, often not even reaching the living wage keeping you in a perpetual stress loop. Ehrenreich's point of view really slams you with the reality that working just for a paycheck in today’s times isn’t all. One can’t "get by" with bad wages completely takes the power away from the workers, keeping them in this cycle of being only worth something if it results in cash. All this dehumanizing is really the same as Marx was referring to when he spoke of capitalist labor: workers become just little cogs in this giant money-making machine with no purpose other than filling the owners’ pockets. Ehrenreich’s graphic accounts of the long hours, physical abuse, and mental duress really rattles a lot of people’s assumptions that having a job somehow equals respect or security. So, her book really turns that myth on its head that working super hard is going to defeat poverty. Ehrenreich makes it really, really clear that no matter how much work you put in, the underlying problems such as low wages, outrageous rents, and no assistance at all from the government make it impossible to get by. By exposing this, she is not only criticizing the bosses, though, but the whole system perpetuating these problems. That whole "meritocracy" notion, with people believing you can just work hard and get ahead, really gets totally destroyed in her book. She illustrates how all of these entrenched inequalities are joining forces to trap the hardest working people in poverty. Her narrative also brushes against the larger landscape of low-wage work and how all that material appears in politics. By highlighting all these laborers trapped in such difficult circumstances, she raises some tough questions about whether our welfare reform and labor policies are actually doing their job. This is a criticism that reaches to both the moral and political heart: it's a wake-up call for us to reconsider what work is and what a person's life is worth, challenging lawmakers to view a living wage as a fundamental right rather than a nice perk for the privileged few. If you're considering sociological theory, Ehrenreich's work actually demonstrates Marx's concept of alienation is still present today. And she approaches it with a feminist twist, showing how women get trapped in low-wage work and are doubly marginalized. Her narrative actually highlights the economic exploitation present out there, while emphasizing how unequal the job split is between the guys and the gals, and how those low wage jobs completely destroy people's economic agency and self esteem. In essence, Nickel and Dimed is really challenging us to think through the things we take for granted about work, worth, and fairness in the economy. It’s challenging us to see beyond our personal decisions and look at the larger picture that determines who will be able to thrive and who will be barely getting by. It’s really pertinent to the times with all the discussion about minimum wage, economic inequality, and how those neoliberal policies are working out.

# data[].attributes.headline
Use of consumption towards "We-ness" (JCB, p. 140)

# data[].attributes.subject
Use of consumption towards "We-ness" (JCB, p. 140)

# data[].attributes.body
Shopping for 'We-ness'" deflects shopping into a socially intermediated, communalized practice of performance instead of dyadic economic exchange. Theory presumes that shopping, either in its low tech face to face or emerging electronic form of Internet retailing, is a ritual practice where one shops as much to perform and instantiate an intersubjective social identity instead of consuming commodities. At the center of this phenomenon is the idea that shopping worlds and virtual shopping worlds are modern stages on which consumer interactions are performances of belonging. In actual stores, all elements of design, anything from the background lighting and tastefully selected background music to the deliberate placement of merchandise are designed to produce a specific mood and to provoke a specific type of social behavior. These cleverly designed environments invite customers into a form of social theater. Customers, in these environments, are not so much doing more than they plan with products as they are acting out a public script that broadcasts who they are and where they stand in some greater cultural tale. On the web, performance of "we-ness" introduces even higher levels of sophistication to the pot. Web shopping websites employ sophisticated data analysis and algorithmic filtering to construct personalized experiences that are close and shared. These websites are designed to replicate the human exchange of actual retail spaces. For example, extremely sophisticated filtered recommendations and targeted marketing not only suggest products but construct a shared sense of identity for users by reacting to prevailing trends and aggregate consumer mood. The store itself is reimagined as a place where personal identity and membership are erased. Online shopping is thereby reclaimed as a social activity, a virtual public space in which every click, scroll, and purchase is a thread in the broader social fabric. And this "we-ness" of retail is also plagued by contradiction. Even as these consumer sites enable a sense of shared identity and shared community, thereby they inevitably also build boundaries of inclusion and exclusion. Shopping rituals can even serve to reify social hierarchies because the very scripted conversations and aimed advertising campaigns are more likely to favor some socioeconomic status and cultural norms over others. The very buildings of such places physical and virtual places can themselves serve as gatekeepers, silently enforcing what is desirable or acceptable. In the most literal sense, if shopping is necessarily a socially unifying activity, it can be one which reifies social hierarchies and relations of power in existence by neatly inscribing the terms of in group membership and out-group membership. In addition, "we-ness" as shopping is also connected to broader cultural stories of consumption and identity. Consumer culture that is postmodern is defined by the interpenetration of market and commercial messages and trends with personal identity. Shopping as a ritual practice is the way in which people live their place in society by performing private narratives that react and comment on prevailing cultural zeitgeist. This identity formation based on consumption then converts ordinary shopping choices into symbolic ones with mass consumption. When consumers go out to shop, they're not merely indulging material hunger; they're affirming membership and asserting shared culture. Computer technology further makes these dynamics even more extensive by providing instant and measurable spaces for identity formation. The use of data analysis and real time feedback mechanisms likes, shares, and comments bakes social validation into the shopping experience. Consumers are rewarded for showing an idealized self that is at once distinctive to their own individual preferences and consistent with the current fashion within their own peer group. The conflict between being distinctive and group membership can ultimately lead to homogenization of identity as the self becomes submerged within the group story. It is a field in which the act of making a purchase is done as an act of embracing otherness and recreating the sameness as self identity is constantly recalibrating in relation to the mass feedback. The findings of "Shopping for 'We-ness'" thus cast phenomenally keen light on shifting currents of consumer culture in the age of technology. It brings to the fore the manner in which the spaces we inhabit in physical or virtual space are not politically passive terrain but are charged with cultural meaning. These spaces are designed such that they establish a sort of social contact that is expressive yet limiting, one that has space for communion but builds borders along the boundaries of social inclusion and exclusion. In situating shopping within group identity performance, this thesis invites us to rethink everyday consumer practice to build and legitimate social order. Collectively, "Shopping for 'We-ness'" goes back to shopping as performative social practice at the center of communal identity formation. By whether self reflexively conceived architecture of shopping space or algorithmically facilitated individualization of online stores, shopping as space is space in which individual and collective identity is negotiated anew. This book deepens our comprehension of consumer society of the present day and of the wider social significance of the way in which commercial life crosses, and is crossed by, the multifaceted web of social relationships. It finally provokes a critical investigation of the Janus face of shopping as a bonding agent and as an activity in redefining differences of the modern society.

# data[].attributes.body
Meyer's If Hitler Asked Me… (pp. 269–276) employs a difficult thought experiment to challenge standard concepts of moral agency, conformity, and the ability of authority to override moral choice. For the experiment, the reader is asked to imagine that he or she is responding to a plea by a famous dictator a highly improbable circumstance used to show how ordinary individuals can abandon their moral code under intense social pressure. The fictional illustration is not to be taken literally but as an explanation of how quick conformity and authority tend to outwit personal moral standards in trying to get a person to relinquish what he or she believes. Meyer's test nearly disproves the common belief that human behaviors are just a reflection of their own intrinsic nature. Instead, it is concerned with the extent to which situational pressures can play a role in shaping moral decisions. It requires social psychology to show how environmental pressures, group processes, and hierarchical structure can render dissidence hard to achieve and in some cases, realistically impossible. Where power is entrenched and group loyalty is especially cherished, independent moral judgment can be greatly undermined. The thought experiment then illustrates how ethics is relative and demonstrates that what is right or wrong to an individual can significantly rely on the prevailing social environment. Meyer's book will speak to our present concern with political responsibility and business accountability. For most modern societies and firms, rigid hierarchies and the attendant assumption of homogeneity can lead to the diffusion of moral responsibility. Individuals become trapped in a process of collective inaction, where group norms exert more influence than individual moral norms. It has occurred through many high profile political and business corruption scandals and caused individuals to wonder if traditional individual models of moral agency can hold. Meyer's book is thus warning and call to research into how social structures can normalize the environments for unethical behavior. Second, the thought experiment challenges researchers and practitioners to consider what interventions will build ethical resistance within groups. In explaining where moral compromise exists, Meyer offers a platform for speaking about mechanisms whereby the agency of individuals can be facilitated and constructed in resisting illicit orders. Some of these mechanisms can include reorganizing organisational cultures to incorporate moral care, applying checks and balances to resist intimidation by authorities, and an organisational culture that encourages dissent and critical thinking rather than suppressing them. Overall, If Hitler Asked Me… is a contribution to ongoing debate on the relationship between power, conformity, and moral choice. It is critical of the idea that moral courage comes by nature and instead fosters that ethical conduct in some way follows from social and organizational contexts by which individuals live. This book challenges us to think differently regarding what we are talking about when we speak about moral agency, to look further than the internal character of someone and to take a glance at the conditions of structure under which ethical actions unfold, which also suppress them from time to time. In so speaking, Meyer's book provides reflective accounts of the ways in which society can be mobilized to the end of facilitating or incapacitating moral action, and thus creating a mandate to construct more secure systems of moral responsibility into the life of business and politics.

# data[].attributes.body
JCB's Shopping/Social Order chapter gives shopping a new meaning by picturing shopping as a multicomplex performance rather than an economic exchange but one which negotiates and constructively constitutes society. Shop space, either physical or virtual, serves as a microcosm of the social order in the chapter. Every one of the tiniest such spaces is carefully planned to manage consumer behavior. Lighting, music, store design, and even product interaction and interaction with in-store personnel are all choreographed elements utilized to produce a constructed environment. The environment leads individuals to behave as if they're adopting scripts according to social convention, much like actors on the stage performing according to social rule. The author argues that shopping malls are not commodity purchasing sites; they are sites one can design where people are constantly constructing and negotiating social identities. When one shops in these structures, he or she is not only purchasing an item but taking part in a social ritual. The consumers unconsciously or consciously pass signs for his or her status, cultural affinity, and belief through his/her conduct. Shopping is thus built as a "we-ness" ritual because individual selves are tied to shared narratives. These rituals reproduce the shared even as they also mark social distinction. The chapter further broadens its discussion to the global business world, where it illustrates how technology has transformed the shopping experience. Algorithm and data mining based internet shopping websites have brought consumer interaction to a whole new level. Online shops bring much of the personality of their brick and mortar counterparts but also niche dynamics. Mass customization, beautifully constructed storefronts, and real-time tracking of trends all work to streamline the process while making it more customized. Convenience is expensive, however: consumer culture of online buying dissolves lines between mass consumption and individual taste, and the shopper must make do with the negotiation between being spoken to as an individual and a broader, more homogenized consumer culture. Spontaneity of electronic buying is juxtaposed to ritual, more deliberative bricks and mortar shopping, but both amount to an examination of shopping locations as aestheticized locales of social performance. Whether they browse a mall or purchase on an online site, the activity is filled with cultural significance. Shopping areas cause customers "perform" their identities in ways that are suitable to dominant social styles, even as they are being gently guided by the intentional design decisions of retailers. These design elements are not arbitrary but intentional, to the extent that all elements of the shopping experience come together to create a sense of overall order and belonging. In short, the Shopping/Social Order chapter eliminates the traditional image of shopping as pure act of consumption. It makes us aware of the fact that any behavior within a store is part of a large social drama. By situating shopping in a performance context, the chapter leads us to appreciate just how deeply consumer behavior is embedded in social structures and cultural norms. It is this appreciation that opens up new possibilities for exploring how the retail environment shapes and is shaped by the ever present tension between individual agency, social norms, and technological change in contemporary consumer culture.

# data[].attributes.headline
How We Present Ourselves in Everyday Life (Goffman)

# data[].attributes.subject
How We Present Ourselves in Everyday Life (Goffman)

# data[].attributes.body
Erving Goffman's The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life (pp. 135-146 excerpt) is a sociological and psychological classic due to its pioneering work on social interaction as performance. Goffman's dramaturgical theory views everyday life as a stage where we perform roles like an actor in a drama. This model provides a reflective model of how people manage the impressions they project in social interaction, seeking to reconcile the tension between public expectation and personal authenticity. The main theme of Goffman's thesis is front stage and backing stage performances behavior. Front stage is the region where people deliberately construct and perform a public self that will be appropriate to society's expectation. Wherever activities such as job interviews, public speaking, or indeed any other kind of formalized talk are being performed, there is always a sense of being watched and needing to do something; individuals rehearse scripted performances, employ specialist stylistic forms of discourse, and employ props or indeed other symbolic artefacts in order to make legitimate the idealised construction. The pressure to perform these social norms can lead to an over-controlled performance in which every movement and look is managed to show competence, politeness, or other accepted social traits. The back stage is a behind-the-scenes setting where pressures on performance are eliminated. It is here, in this place, that individuals will more freely reveal those places of identity concealed from the external world, for a truer presentation of self. It is this type of dichotomy that speaks to a basic conflict: the competing need to be real and yet satisfy the demands of social performance. Goffman's theory makes us consider how ordinary what we assume is actually performance, creation by reference to the needs of a culture and to the present context of interaction. The scope of Goffman's dramaturgical analysis is rich and widespread in our own day, especially in the age of the internet. Social network sites are huge front stages upon which people are constantly performing their web personas. Every status, photo, and comment are all components of ongoing performance to achieve social acceptance and affirm a particular self. This virtual performance dissolves the front stage of back stage boundary because the spaces that initialy belonged to private, unself-conscious action are open to public examination. Thus pressure to make idealized appearances mounting, and strain on maintaining one's notion of self consistent all the more so. Goffman's discovery also leads us to think about psychological and social costs of long term performance. Activity involved in making impressions on a daily basis may create what some writers have called "emotional labor" tension and strain that accrue because continual pressure to meet external demands is exerted. The labor is not just a personal expense but one that presages more diffuse cultural demands that naturalize particular kinds of behavior and stigmatise others that fail to fulfill these demands. The performance of self, thus, is not just a matter of individual identity but also social order; it affirms norms and values that constitute the bases of social hierarchies. Lastly, Goffman's scholarship raises some really tough questions concerning what authenticity entails. Because interaction is so utterly performed whether face-to-face or through terminals it is increasingly hard to pinpoint what a "true" self would be like. The public and private interpenetrations reveal the insecurity of tangible definitions of self, challenging us to think about the way we understand and create tangible expression of self. Nowhere is that unease more resonant than in conflicts over the role of digital media in self as posed-up photos and bogus stories presented on social spaces attempt to conceal the mess and contradiction of actual living. Overall, so, Goffman's The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life is a brief and lasting guide to the manner in which humans manage social interactional demands. By drawing attention to the performative nature of everyday conduct, Goffman not only invites us to observe how social norms construct our public selves but also challenges us to examine the limits between performance and authenticity. His observations are particularly pertinent to our times, for the virtual age makes the necessity of self-presentation more sharply defined and obfuscates the line between private and public and compels us to think practically about how we navigate social expectation and attempt to achieve authenticity.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 10 of JCB "The Self and Social Interaction."

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 10 of JCB "The Self and Social Interaction."

# data[].attributes.body
This chapter gives you a new spin on identity. More of this shifting vibe that's always in the process of changing what people refer to as a "brand." It's not so much about having a firm, inner self; it's more of this blend that changes with our social energy and the culture that we're in. This theory reverses the typical notion that identity is something that's hard and fast that never moves Instead, showing that our identitie exist in terms of how we interact with others and the characteristics that make us different Everything is digital now and It's crazy how people Build their whole identities on social media. These sites are sort of like platforms that people use to show off and share stories about their life. When someone posts a profile photo or updates their status, it's not always a reflection of how they truly feel; it's a performance that is meant to fit what is cool and what other people happen to enjoy. The online self becomes this combination of carefully selected images that are meant to impress others and accumulate likes, shares, and positive comments. The chapter jumps right into the conflict of being genuine vs pretending to do it all for the sake of an image. On the one hand, we all have this immense need to reveal our "real selves," to share whence we come, how we truly feel, and what we do to exist as such. Then, though, comes this absurd expectation to conform to what society deems popular and what will, ultimately, pay the rent. In a world in which being noticed and popular gets traded for things such as love, job proposals, or social status, it feels as though trying to achieve that idealized, "perfect" version of you is simply not possible. It's seriously a question it raises: Are we ever truly able to show the world our real selves without censoring, or do we end up putting on a show to please everyone but ourselves?. The chapter later on gets into the entire self-branding phenomenon as being not about a person, but as actually changing the way we perceive social hierarchies and the way we relate to one another. How we project online becomes entirely different in terms of how people see us, you know? Online communication keeps re-defining what's cool and what's not, entirely on the basis of the cool images and stories we present. As a result, our relationships end up being highly dependent on our online life, sort of caught in this vicious cycle of needing the likes and validation online to entirely change the way we exist in the real world. Right where online chatting meets hanging out in the real world is this entire idea of selling yourself as a commodity, with our personal traits becoming these hot commodities and slogans and everyone wanting to purchase them in bulk. Ultimately, the chapter is challenging us to more closely scrutinize what self-branding in our society means. As our identities blur with money and trends, it’s easy to see that there’s a massive overlap between who we truly are and what the marketplace wants. These changes not only re-imagine how we see things but also meddles with the way we interact with one another. Really, self-branding reverses existing social hierarchies on their head, allowing people to project the sides of themselves that they want others to see. At the same time, it could also reduce rich experiences to a few sanctioned scripts, which keeps perpetuating the same old cultural ideals and marginalizing other stories. This chapter forces you to consider the way that identity plays out in performance and the commodification aspect of it, forcing you to look closely at how much of the real us comes out in public performances. The big deal is that our material and virtual experiences have a heck of a lot more to do with endlessly performing the self as opposed to revealing a secret truth inside. That modern conception of self as self-branding is a big key to understanding how we're interacting socially today since it demonstrates that it's as much a function of our environments as it is of what's happening inside of us. JCB Chapter 10 offers a good overview of how self-branding operates in the construction of modern identity. It explores the strange contradiction of being an authentic self in a world that is primarily concerned with performance metrics and cash considerations, as well as the way digital media fundamentally alters how we construct, share, and grasp our identities. Through an examination of these large-scale issues, the chapter gets the challenging balance between personal identity, cultural talk, and the way social interaction keeps changing.

# data[].attributes.body
“Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?” (pp. 63–72) explores the way that we perceive discrimination in the workplace and particularly how one small error on your record such as a criminal record can completely mess up your ability to get a call-back or get in for an interview. The research uses this awesome field experiment with paired testing or matched sampling where they mail out two resumes that are identical in every respect; one has the identical credentials, education level, and experience but carries that criminal record. By leaving everything else constant except for that one detail, Pager is effectively controlling for those other things and can observe directly how much harm this stigma inflicts. The findings are that being simply associated with criminality is enough to effectively reduce your chances of being called in for an interview or receiving a call-back by a significant degree. Pager's experiment is totally significant, not only because it was conducted very well, but because it has a lot of implications. It's a complete game changer for the theory that hiring is equitable and illustrates exactly how biases creep into hiring. The evidence is fairly solid that employers' opinions are heavily determined by social stigma, and people with a record have huge obstacles in their path, even if they are as qualified as those without records. What Pager found illustrates that bias in the labor market isn't so much a matter of personal bias; it's more a systemic issue that maintains social hierarchies and makes it difficult for people to rise through the ranks. These days, with so many corporations utilizing online recruitment tools and algorithms in human resources, this research is more pertinent than ever. These new algorithms based on historical data have a tendency to reinforce current biases by incorporating stigmatized information in their choices. This raises a lot of questions about whether tech is beneficial or merely perpetuating these disparities, as online systems can fully perpetuate these discriminatory patterns, and Pager's research really illustrates that. So, Pager's research actually gets at social psychology and illustrates that something that appears harmless in and of itself, such as a "bad label," can literally transform people's perceptions of themselves and others' perceptions of them as well. It makes you consider the larger problem of stigma and how it perpetuates those social hierarchies and allows bias to become embedded in our systems. When you consider what having a criminal record actually signifies, this research is compelling policymakers and HR types to address those unfair disparities head-on when making hiring decisions. "Would You Hire an Ex-Convict” actually brings a lot of attention to a lot of things regarding discrimination, structural bias, and identity. It actually kind of flips on its head that whole meritocracy thing by demonstrating that being hired has more to do with these structural biases than with skills or talent. And it actually puts a lot of focus on how this is going to inform hiring trends in the future, and that is a big deal when we are dealing with social identity and stigma and how these structural things cut certain groups out.

# data[].attributes.body
Advertising research is a tricky combination of money and what's happening in culture. Rather than imagining research as this dull chore, a group of research has found that these practices are actually connected to business objectives and what society perceives as normal. This group of research examines how conducting surveys, determining variables, and interpreting data is not only about being objective is also about shaping people's behavior as consumers. There is a lot of research that indicates that advertising is actually more about making money and is rooted in cultural concepts. The way that they design their research materials such as the way that survey questions are phrased, samples are selected, and data is mined actually links what people think with what advertisers are looking for. "Consumer engagement" and "brand loyalty" aren't so much naturally occurring; they are constructed through tactics that are designed to influence behaviors that'll bring in revenue. This setup shows how market-based concepts are designed to maximize profits while avoiding the messy realities that come with how people actually behave. research on advertising is not actually objective, the survey questions are a good example because they are designed to produce answers that are very easy to understand and that support the narrative that companies are trying to tell. "Satisfaction," "loyalty," and "engagement" are terms that have cultural meanings that can actually bias the information and perpetuate certain stereotypes. And often those who are conducting the sampling are looking at consumer markets that are most lucrative. This only conceals large social trends and perpetuates inequality by excluding people who are not marketable. research indicates that in advertising, it is not so much about checking boxes as actually about performance. It is more a matter of seeing things a certain way rather than crunching numbers. When researchers refer to consumer responses as "good" or "bad," they are completely not objective; they are imposing their spin and selecting what behavior is more significant. This entire game of sorting keeps hype going around what is and isn't cool when we shop. So, uncovering what people do becomes a discussion of playing by the book in our marketplace culture. digital tech has revolutionized research in a big way; We now have these sophisticated algorithms that enable us to make predictions about what consumers are going to do next. But here's a twist: with all this cutting-edge equipment, recent research indicates that the very same biases and subjectivity are still around. Those digital algorithms are based on outdated data that likely has its own cultural and economic bias, perpetuating the very imbalances that exist. Metrics like “click-through rate,” “engagement duration,” and “conversion rate” effectively reduce people's complex behavior to a handful of simple metrics. This type of methodology may be missing out on that deeper insight into consumer behavior that we need in order to understand how the market actually works. So, this research is all about consumer identity and how advertising research defines who we are as consumers. These categories that come out of these studies are not arbitrary tags; they actually influence who people perceive as a "good" or "successful" consumer. Researchers learned that by promoting specific behaviors, these studies actually reinforce stereotypes and marginalize people who don't fit into the normative ideas that market research speaks about. Additionally, researchers' personal bias, particularly when there is money involved, makes it that much more challenging to present findings that are not biased. The research indicates that constructing consumer identities through this research is a political process that sustains power relations and social inequities. Moving to Improved Research Habits More and more are calling for us to actually rethink doing research in advertising because there is a lot of bias in what we are currently doing. A lot of critics are saying that we need to be more representative and that we need to make certain that we are gaining a diverse range of experience and opinion in our research. This shift is very significant if we actually hope to learn about what various people are like as customers. In addition to that, there is a lot of attention today on the ethical aspect of gathering digital information and utilizing algorithms in advertising research in the future. Emerging research is calling for greater openness and accountability with digital tools and is all about ethical approaches that look after customers and not merely pursuing quick profits. Conclusion Hey, so here's the thing: this research on advertising and how we do it proves that trying to figure out what people like is not so much a techy thing. Really, it's kind of messy and wrapped up with money and cultural atmosphere. Each and every decision that we make in how we do things from creating questionnaires to constructing algorithms can actually influence what society considers normal and perpetuate those gaps. The research highlights that it is absolutely critical to understand how these research practices are done because that is a major step towards making things more equitable, more ethical, and just better overall. By looking at what we are doing now closely, future research could actually get a grip on consumer behavior like, having a full picture of human life and not just breaking it down into things that are easy to market.

# data[].attributes.headline
JCB p. 50: Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian Perspectives

# data[].attributes.subject
JCB p. 50: Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian Perspectives

# data[].attributes.body
Marksist look at the struggle between classes and the inequality in society while the Durkheimian explains that all systems are individual clogs in a machine that keeps it going. In terms I understand Mark’s idea is that “the game was rigged from the start” while Durk’s game works because everyone plays it.

# data[].attributes.headline
Candace Clark, Sympathy in Everyday Life (p. 118-134)

# data[].attributes.subject
Candace Clark, Sympathy in Everyday Life (p. 118-134)

# data[].attributes.body
Clark explains sympathy is a learned behavior that is affected by cultural norms which I agree to a extent, although it is certainly learn it is within human behavior to be sympathetic even if it is only for self gain as Clark later states. I would also agree that social status affects sympathy, a resent example would be the California fires with rich people and celebrities not getting any due to how little they tend to struggle compared to others in the same area.

# data[].attributes.headline
3. Edward T. Hall & Mildred R. Hall, The Sounds of Silence (p. 109-117)

# data[].attributes.subject
3. Edward T. Hall & Mildred R. Hall, The Sounds of Silence (p. 109-117)

# data[].attributes.body
The article talks about how non verbal communication affects everyone from different cultures. The difference between eye contact touch and personal space seep to be major ones, I remember I had a classmate in which his culture said that looking someone in the eyes was disrespectful leading to the teacher interpreting his lack of eye contact as the opposite of respectful.

# data[].attributes.headline
Horace Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema (p.87-91)

# data[].attributes.subject
Horace Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema (p.87-91)

# data[].attributes.body
Nacirema is a play on words to American, I remember doing a reading about the Mockumenatary during anthropology. Reading about the “holy mouth man”/dentist was just as fun as the first time, Miner’s exaggeration an satirisation of our day to day shows just how wording things differently makes them look alien no matter how mundane and normal they are something I learn was extremely normal on early anthropology.

# data[].attributes.body
The reading is about the relationship between food and culture if the title wasn’t explicit enough, it goes a little deep discussing how food choices show our social identity, traditions, and economic factors which is something I never really taught about that deeply, I just assumed food was just food but now I see it’s more complex than that.

# data[].attributes.body
My name is victor, I like long walks in the beach, pina coladas, and getting caught in the rain. I am currently enrolled in this class because I was interested in the subject and the course also aligns with what I want to do in the future.