# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 12 Music/ Racism and Cultural Appropriation 

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 12 Music/ Racism and Cultural Appropriation 

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 12 uses something as ordinary as music to deconstruct deep sociological themes regarding identity, inequality, and power. This chapter invites readers to think of their everyday listening habits as reflecting bigger social forces. Music, they argue, is not simply entertainment or personal choice; it is a form of "stuff" from which people express identity, construct belonging, and participate in systems of meaning and inequality. Our musical tastes, preferred genres, and playlists are all shaped by social hierarchies such as race, class, and culture. The chapter provokes readers to consider why they like to listen to specific genres of music, how taste is employed to mark out social divisions, and how subcultures arise from around sound as manifestations of resistance, identity, and belonging.

The chapter also delves into the way musical subcultures like punk, hip-hop, or metal are not just aesthetic concerns; they are closely tied to social location, class, and race. Subcultures come into being against the mainstream, but they're frequently co-opted by the mainstream culture and commodified into profitable ventures. This relates to the chapter's discussion of racism in music and how genres that are rooted in lived experiences of racialized groups, namely Black groups, will be co-opted and commodified by other groups. Authors detail how popular culture and the music industry have a tendency to appropriate these forms, reaping profit and cultural capital as they marginalize or push to the sidelines the original artists. These types of patterns form part of what sociologists describe as cultural appropriation, in which elements of a dominated culture are adopted by a dominant culture without acknowledgment, awareness, or respect for the culture's history or struggles.

Cultural appropriation, as is contended in the chapter, is not borrowing or appreciation; it is power. When members of dominant groups borrow music, dress, or language from oppressed groups without engaging with the history or structural discrimination that lies behind it, they reinforce racial hierarchies. For example, when white musicians who belong to the mainstream profit from musical styles that were constructed in Black cultures, such artists come to enjoy praise and commercial success that was not offered to the producers. This illustrates how racism is effective through cultural production and taste rather than just through direct discrimination. The chapter invites the reader to apply their sociological imagination to their own listening choices and connect them to the wider structures of inequality, capitalism, and cultural politics that make them up.

A relevant article that delves more into these ideas is Ruka Hatua-Saar White's "Cultural Appropriation in Music," released by Berklee Online. The article explains how musical appropriation occurs when artists appropriate styles, sounds, or appearances from other cultures without their source being acknowledged or the involved communities being consulted. White gives examples of how white artists have utilized Black musical traditions in a manner that erases the music from its social and political roots. The article is highlighting that appropriation is not simply imitation, but it is in terms of unequal profit and power. It encourages artists and listeners alike to be respectful and mindful by educating themselves on the history of music they are listening to and ensuring that credit and economic compensation are reapplied to the artists.

Collectively, Chapter 12 and White's article make it clear that our cultural practices and musical tastes are always politicized. The music we listen to, the artists we like, and the subcultures we belong to are all linked to histories of inequality, struggle, and resistance. By acknowledging this, there is a more ethical and knowledgeable engagement with culture and music that is aware of its origins, resists its exploitation, and is aware of its ability to create and represent social life. Through this chapter, ultimately, we learn that our daily "stuff," our playlists included, can tell us deep things about ourselves and what kind of society we inhabit

# data[].attributes.body
As I read Chapter 6, Spots/Race, I had a more sociological understanding of how race, meritocracy, and group boundaries intersect in the world of sports. The authors use the world of sports as an accessible yet powerful model to illustrate how social structures and inequalities shape everyday life. Although sport is commonplace as a meritocratic domain in which individual talent and hard work solely determine success, this chapter illustrates that this assumption overlooks the persistent influence of racial and social stratifications. Rather than a truly "level playing field," sport reflects the broader social inequalities that are formed and reinforced through access, opportunity, and cultural discourse.

One of the significant things that I have come to understand in this chapter is the idea that race is socially constructed and not a biological reality. Within sport, racial meanings are constantly reconfirmed through stereotypes such as that of the "natural Black athlete." While this stereotype may appear to be complimentary, it reinforces racial essentialism on the basis that it implies that sporting success among certain racial groups is based on innate ability and not training, intelligence, or discipline. Not only does this way of thinking limit the ways in which we think about athletic performance, but it also contributes to the maintenance of racial inequality. The chapter's analysis points out how "natural talent" ideology masks structural barriers, and racial stereotypes persist in subtle and overt forms.

I was also impressed with the meritocracy and group boundaries section. Despite sports being widely envisioned as open fields in which anyone can thrive with equal chance, the authors make it clear that underlying structural inequalities, such as differential access to quality facilities, coaching, and financial support, decide who plays and advances. These social boundaries also determine not only who plays the game but also who leads and controls it. It is not unusual, for instance, for players of color to dominate the field, while positions of leadership in coaching, ownership, and administration remain disproportionately in the hands of whites. This distinction illustrates how institutions can symbolically embrace diversity while still practicing structural exclusion.

In addition, the chapter connects sport with consumer culture and identity formation, showing how fandom, media representation, and marketing are constitutive of racialized formations of belonging. Sport consumption in the form of attending games, purchasing merchandise, or joining fan communities online expresses broader social fault lines. This section of the reading led me to reflect on how everyday activities, such as following a team or identifying with a particular athlete, are intertwined with social identity and group belonging. In order to advance my learning, I read Ben Carrington's (2013) article, The Critical Sociology of Race and Sport: The First Fifty Years, which corroborates the textbook material. Carrington argues that sport is both a reflection and a reproducer of racial ideologies in the world systems of power, such as colonialism and capitalism. His book demonstrates how sport cannot be separated from the cultural and historical contexts in which it occurs. Carrington's argument made me realize that although sports can reproduce inequality, they can also be utilized as a source of resistance and social change. Instances of athlete activism like Colin Kaepernick's protests or broader movements like Black Lives Matter in sports illustrate how individuals can challenge institutionalized racism through visible means of dissent.

Overall, this chapter added to Carrington's article my appreciation of the ways in which popular cultural practices, such as sport, are located within wider social structures. Sports are not just games or entertainment; they are complex social fields in which ideologies of race, merit, and identity are endlessly negotiated. Through this examination, I have come to appreciate how the sociological imagination allows us to connect everyday experiences like participating in or watching sports to broader patterns of power and inequality. Being able to recognize the underlying social processes in seemingly neutral ground is a basic step in understanding how structural change can occur both in sports and in society in general.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required Entry: Wealth Inequality in the United States

# data[].attributes.subject
Required Entry: Wealth Inequality in the United States

# data[].attributes.body
The video Wealth Inequality in America offers a brief, graphic portrayal of the enormous discrepancy between how Americans believe wealth is being distributed, how they believe it should be distributed, and how wealth is actually being distributed in the United States. Most viewers will be shocked to learn that the richest 1% of Americans own a spectacularly disproportionate share of the country's wealth, while the poorest 80% own only a minuscule slice. Such outrageous inequality violates the popular expectations about the American Dream, meritocracy, and fairness, all of which are major concerns in the sociological significance of stratification and social class. The video jumps right into the concept of social stratification, the organized arrangement of individuals into power and wealth hierarchies within society. Stratification systems, especially in capitalist societies like the U.S., organize inequality such that people's mastery of goods like wealth, education, healthcare, and political power relies primarily on the position in the social hierarchy. The video is used to demonstrate this inequality and reveals that not only is the distribution skewed, but also misconstrued by the public at large, thus bringing about the sociological concept of false consciousness. This is an expression developed by Karl Marx and is used to denote how the working class may not be entirely aware of the extent of their exploitation or the actual nature of the social order. The video suggests that the majority of Americans are unaware of just how much wealth inequality actually is, and therefore cannot challenge or change the system.

Secondly, the video demonstrates the sociological distinction between income and wealth, something critical to understanding class inequality. Income is earnings from labor or investment, whereas wealth consists of stored money in the form of property, stocks, and inheritance. As this course has explored, wealth is a stronger determinant of long-term security and social mobility, and it is far more unequally distributed than income. This suggests the potential that ascribed status (born into) will be more predictive than achieved status (earned through effort), challenging the illusion that success is based solely on effort. The video also enables interpretation according to different theoretical perspectives in sociology. From the conflict theory perspective, inequality of riches shows structural differences that are intrinsic to the capitalist system, where a minuscule elite class controls the means of production and reaps disproportionately from the labor of the working class. This theory argues that power is used by the economic elite to maintain their dominance, e.g., influencing political and economic policy to maintain the status quo. By contrast, a functionalist would perhaps argue that there is some need for inequality to motivate individuals to accept different roles within society, but that the levels exhibited in the video can be seen as being dysfunctional and unhealthy for social stability.

Additionally, the video highlights issues concerning social mobility, or the ability of individuals or families to rise or fall through the social scale. America supports upward mobility theoretically through hard work and education, but what the video displays shows that the concentration of wealth limits these possibilities for most Americans. As we’ve learned in this course, factors like race, gender, and family background also play critical roles in determining one’s life chances, and the accumulation (or lack) of wealth across generations exacerbates these inequalities.

Lastly, the video challenges us to consider the sociological concept of ideology, the dominant set of beliefs and values that justify and maintain existing social arrangements. The overall sense of meritocracy and individual responsibility has a tendency to mask the structural inequity that the video uncovers. When most individuals in a population view the system as being fair, they will be less likely to support redistributive measures or to challenge economic power, even when they are privileged against it. Wealth Inequality in America is an engaging illustration of basic sociological concepts like stratification, class, power, and ideology. It uncovers the gap between economic perception and public reality and provokes critical analysis of how regimes of inequality are reproduced in society. When we read the video sociologically, we better see how inequality of wealth is not merely an economic issue, but an extremely social one that affects opportunity, democracy, and the fabric of everyday life.

# data[].attributes.body
In Stephen Higley's "The U.S. Upper Class," he analyzes how the American upper class exists not just as a group of wealthy individuals but as a definable social class with shared interests, institutions, and mechanisms of self-perpetuation. In Higley's view, this group exercises a solidarity or "common fate" solidified by closed social ties, education, clubs, and intermarriage. It is not just a function of income or wealth; it is a question of lifestyle, tradition, and system of organized exclusion. Perhaps the most significant tool for policing the edge of this elite group is the Social Register, which more or less charts who belongs in "proper society." The Social Register determines social acceptability among upper-class levels, and marriage or affiliation outside of the group can lead to reexamination of membership. These tools reveal that upper-class status is not strictly economic but deeply social, determined by ancestry, behavior, and institutional associations.

Higley continues to explain how elite prep schools, Ivy League universities, fraternities, and high-end country clubs all contribute to socializing offspring of the upper class into their expected roles. These institutions do not merely transmit scholarly information but also convey values, manners, connections, and expectations that contribute to perpetuating elite positions over generations. Old-money families are particularly favored in such systems; Higley observes that cultural capital, like taste, conduct, and social information, tends to be more significant than money by itself. That is, being moneyed does not necessarily equate to being upper class in this regard unless one is also socialized into elite culture and networks. One of the dominant themes of the article is the manner in which the upper class differentiates itself from the other classes, both physically and socially. Higley explains the use of elite neighborhoods, gated communities for retirement, elite clubs, and social parties to maintain such distance. Such segregation also further distances the upper class from the prosaic issues and concerns of most of the population. These customs limit chances of social mobility and lead to a society where class position becomes unachievable to transcend. The article also implies broader social effects. Since the upper class not only possesses wealth but also access to elite networks, culture, and institutions, they can set agendas on politics, education, and philanthropy that serve their own interests. Higley's writing highlights that economic inequality is merely one aspect of class inequality in America, which is based on a complex web of self-perpetuating institutions that protect privilege.

One recent publication supporting Higley's argument is Greg Gutfield's "Rediscovering E. Digby Baltzell's Sociology of Elites," published in the American Affairs Journal (2021). Gutfield returns to Baltzell's original historical analysis of the American elite and affirms much of what Higley has to say, not least the importance of elite institutions and cultural capital in maintaining class distinctions. Baltzell's research confirms that elite social institutions like prep schools, fraternities, and clubs support upper-class superiority. His research also highlights the importance of WASP heritage (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant) in creating upper-class identity in times past, illustrating how class standing is inextricably linked with race, religion, and tradition, and not just money.

From my own experience, Higley's analysis has helped me more fully appreciate just how deeply ingrained structural class privilege truly is. Although I do not belong to the upper class he is referring to, I've witnessed how networks and attendance at high-status institutions greatly affected people's opportunities. My acquaintances with family connections or who attended high-status schools seemed to have career or internship opportunities that others were not even aware of. This confirmed my suspicion that hard work and ability are only half the story; who you know and the way you are socialized do play a role. Higley's articulation about elite schools and clubs also made me think about my own educational background. Attending public schools and working part-time jobs throughout college gives me a very different perspective from someone who went to a boarding school or had legacy admissions at an Ivy League institution. I’ve sometimes felt “out of place” in professional or academic settings where certain cultural cues, such as how to speak, dress, network, or even what hobbies are valued, clearly reflect upper-class norms. Realizing this made me understand those emotions not as personal failures, but as products of social stratification.

In addition, the reading disaffirmed some of my old assumptions regarding social mobility. I used to believe when I was young that if you worked diligently, you could accomplish anything. Even as I still believe effort matters, Higley's work illustrates there are barriers that hard work can't break through, particularly when institutions are designed to bring some in and keep others out. It's made me more reflective about building connections and learning about the hidden rules that control access to power. Ultimately, Higley's examination of the U.S. upper class is that of a messy and self-sustaining system of privilege well beyond money. It is a legacy-based class, socialized and based on elite institutions, guaranteeing inequality that carries over from generation to generation. His work, especially paired with Baltzell's historical context, dispels the myth of American meritocracy and reveals more about why upward mobility can remain so unattainable. Personally, it has enhanced my knowledge of class systems and forced me to think critically about the apparatuses that regulate opportunity in American life.

# data[].attributes.body
In "Moving Up from the Working Class," sociologists Joan Morris and Michael Grimes explore the complex cultural and emotional lives of people who move up from working-class backgrounds into middle-class careers, and particularly into academia. Based on interviews and sociological theory, they argue that early class socialization is imprinted indelibly on people, shaping the way people feel, think, and behave even many years after they have economically or professionally advanced. For example, many individuals who become upwardly mobile are likely to feel uncomfortable or "culture shocked" when entering middle-class environments. The tastes, values, and habits they developed as children, such as speaking honestly, being pragmatic, or avoiding abstractions, may clash with expectations of education or working life, where small talk, self-promotion, and abstract thinking are the norm.

The authors also describe that social class is more than money. They utilize a model that divides class into three components: property (wealth), skills and credentials (such as education), and organizational power (power over others at work). Individuals who rise may advance in one or two of these, but nevertheless feel misplaced or inferior in the other two. For instance, a blue-collar worker who gets a PhD might be rather socially inept at reception cocktail parties or simply completely uncertain of what to wear, say, or do in his or her new reality. Such "cultural capital gaps" can create emotional unease and a feeling of not belonging. Also, working-class people do not always possess "social capital," or helpful contacts and acquaintances, that make their rise more challenging than that of privileged birth members.

One of the most compelling points Morris and Grimes present is that social mobility often results in internal conflict. People who "rise up" are sometimes stuck between two worlds. They may feel proud of their accomplishment and be grateful for it. But at the same time, they can feel guilty about or alienated from their family members and friends who did not make it. For example, relatives or family can view the upwardly mobile person as arrogant or "forgetting where they came from." At the same time, the new middle-class peers can also make them feel like outsiders or ask them to change. This leads to what the authors describe as a sort of identity strain, switching or balancing between two quite different class cultures.

The authors also note that not everyone has the same experience with this. Class mobility is shaped by gender, ethnicity, and race. A working-class woman, for example, will be under greater pressure to keep quiet or remain humble, contrary to middle-class norms that appreciate being assertive and self-advertising. In a similar manner, people of color will face discrimination or tokenization in new workplaces, which will further complicate the experience of mobilizing class. These intersectional problems show that mobility is not so much a matter of hard work, but how social identities are addressed by systemic obstacles.

Overall, Morris and Grimes present social mobility not only as a success narrative but also as a multifaceted process with emotional and cultural requirements. The upgraders typically have to pay in doubting themselves, alienation, and tension in their original groups. They are like they belong nowhere. However, others are able to bridge the gap by reconciling the values of their former lives with those of their new ones, or by using what they learned to help others traverse parallel paths.

A companion text that offers insight for this reading is Claire Bennett's "Cultural Capital and Social Exclusion: A Critical Analysis." Bennett is critical of the manner in which institutions and schools seem to hold in esteem middle-class knowledge, speech, and conduct, while devaluing or overlooking the working-class culture's strengths. As with Morris and Grimes, she illustrates that working-class individuals are not inherently less intelligent or talented but lack the hidden information and codes that allow others to progress. Both readings together identify that social class is not just an issue of financial remuneration but also of identity, culture, and access to power.

# data[].attributes.body
In The Uses of Poverty, Herbert Gans writes about why poverty continues to exist in society, even though most people agree it’s a problem. Gans argues that poverty lasts not just because of bad policies or economic failure, but because it actually helps certain groups, especially the nonpoor. Using a sociological perspective called functionalism, Gans explains that poverty serves several important functions that benefit society’s more powerful and wealthier groups. First, he talks about how poverty helps the economy. Poor people are the ones who usually take low-paying, dirty, or dangerous jobs that most others don’t want. Because they’re paid very little, it keeps costs down for businesses and for people who buy goods and services. Poverty also creates jobs for others, like social workers, police officers, or public health workers who are paid to work with or manage poor communities. In addition, poor people buy cheap, used, or leftover goods, which helps keep certain markets going. Gans also explains how poverty helps with social and cultural roles. For example, society often views poor people as examples of what not to be, labeling them as lazy or irresponsible. This makes others feel better about themselves and reinforces common values like hard work and self-discipline. Poor communities also influence culture; many styles of music, fashion, and slang come from them and later become popular with the middle and upper classes. Plus, having poor people helps others feel successful by comparison. People often measure their status by looking at those who have less.

Politically, poor people don’t have much power, so they can be used as symbols or examples in political debates. Politicians might talk about helping the poor to win votes, or blame them for problems in society. Also, poor neighborhoods are often the ones most affected by construction or city development; they’re the ones pushed out to make room for highways or new buildings. This means the poor carry the costs of change, while others benefit. At the end of the essay, Gans says that many of these roles could be filled in other ways, but those changes would likely cost more money or effort from the non-poor. He makes it clear that he’s not saying poverty is good, but that it continues because some people benefit from it. If we want to truly fight poverty, we need to understand who gains from it staying the way it is and be willing to challenge that system. A related article by Gans, written in 1994, is called “The Positive Functions of the Undeserving Poor.” In it, he talks more about how poor people, especially those labeled as the “undeserving poor” or “underclass,” are used by society in harmful ways. For example, they are blamed for crime, used as political tools, and made into negative stereotypes. This article builds on his earlier ideas and shows how the way we talk about poverty also helps keep it going. Overall, Gans’s writing helps us think differently about poverty. Instead of just asking why people are poor, he asks why society allows poverty to exist in the first place and who might be benefiting from it. His essay is a reminder that solving poverty isn’t just about helping the poor; it’s also about changing the systems that keep them poor.

# data[].attributes.body
In Chapter 4, the authors write about how something as mundane as coffee consumption is completely invested in taste systems, class, and cultural meaning. Rather than perceiving coffee consumption as a simple exercise in individual preference, the chapter reveals how our tastes and shopping practices respond to broader social arrangements. The choice between a $1 gas station coffee, a Starbucks latte, or a third-wave pour-over at a neighborhood artisanal coffeehouse is not only a question of taste, but also one of identity construction, class identification, and cultural capital. These choices say something about who we are or aspire to be and usually put us in place among some social groupings. The authors argue that taste is not individual and neutral but is conditioned by social environment, upbringing, and education. A claim that borrows directly from Pierre Bourdieu's theory of distinction. Bourdieu argued that "good taste" was a product of class, not natural ability, and elites use taste as a signifier of social distinctions to acquire privilege.

The chapter describes the "paradox of the $4 cappuccino," where people are paying more for coffee not just because of quality, but due to what the coffee means. The value of the beverage is not just in the flavor but in its symbolic capital; it symbolizes knowledge, sophistication, or belonging to a certain lifestyle. The atmosphere of the upscale coffee shops, the design on the cups, the country of origin of the beans, and even the terminology used (e.g., "single-origin" or "fair trade") all do their part in the cultural role of coffee. Making choices along these lines is socially performing identity, and in doing so, individuals are participating in the unobtrusive reproduction of class. This also refers to the idea of commodity fetishism, where we are all concerned with the symbolic and aesthetic aspects of a commodity without being attached to the social conditions of work under which it is produced. The chapter gently critiques this by highlighting the concealed inequalities in coffee's chain of supply from the labor of coffee farmers to corporate exploitation in the Global North.

This chapter resonated with me personally. I would go to a third-wave coffee house locally that featured pour-over brewing, a minimalist look, and sold beans in evocative descriptions of taste. I wasn't there for the flavor per se; I found myself wanting something bigger or more familiar instead, but I enjoyed the ambiance and felt that the shop was reflective of my personal values. Over time, I came to understand that I had started associating some coffee flavors internally, not because I liked the taste but because I perceived it as being more "sophisticated." It was less a matter of changing taste than social hierarchy. I began linking instant coffee or chain coffee shops with lower quality, despite being raised with them. In hindsight, this decision had not been quality-driven but class-coded implications. I also learned that where specialty coffee was out of the question, or when there was limited money involved, I easily defaulted to quicker options. This compelled me to realize how class and geography both shape and restrict "taste." My own coffee culture became a reflection of my changing social location and an illustration of how consumption is tied to identity and belonging.

To further advance this, the article "Coffee, Connoisseurship, and an Ethnomethodologically-Informed Sociology of Taste" by John Manzo (2010) is a good contribution to the chapter. Manzo analyzes how so-called coffee connoisseurs discuss taste, quality, and authenticity in Internet forums. Through ethnomethodology, he shows that coffee connoisseurs indeed actively negotiate what makes "good coffee" through social interaction and discourse rather than merely internalizing dominant norms. This perspective yields a bottom-up account of how taste cultural norms are made and regulated, and illustrates that consumers are not merely the product of class structure but are also agents for making taste boundaries. Manzo's work adds to Bourdieu's structuralist account by noting agency and reflexivity in taste-making. It illustrates how people not only use coffee but also produce meaning about it through blog posts, commentaries, and social media, which further perpetuate certain hierarchies of taste.

This chapter reveals the complexity of taste and consumption. Coffee, as a daily practice, is now an entry into wider sociological issues, how class operates behind the scenes, how culture as a dimension of capital, and how even our most mundane decision-making is shaped by and contributes to social inequality. By looking at something as ordinary as coffee with a sociological lens, we can now observe the concealed infrastructures that shape us. We also learn to inquire about our own assumptions and habits, including: what does my taste say about me, and how is it made up of forces I might not even know? This chapter ultimately shows that the "stuff" of everyday life is never stuff. It is a map of society, full of meaning, history, and power.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading Chapter 3, I feel like the Fight for $15 campaign is not only fair but it’s necessary. I’ve never worked in fast food myself, but I know people who have, and I’ve seen how hard they work for very little pay. It’s tiring, fast-paced, and workers are expected to deal with a lot of angry customers, messy tasks, and long hours, often with no benefits or job security. To me, it makes total sense that these workers should be paid at least $15 an hour and have the right to unionize. No one should have to work full-time and still struggle to pay their rent or buy groceries. Chapter 3 helped me understand how these jobs are part of a bigger economic system that keeps wages low to increase profits. It really opened my eyes to how unfair that system is.

One thing I found interesting in the reading was how companies treat labor as just another cost to be controlled. That made me think about how fast-food companies spend millions on advertising or new tech, but they resist paying their workers a living wage. It shows how workers are often undervalued, even though they’re the ones keeping the business running. I also think unionizing is important because it gives workers a voice. Without a union, it’s easy for companies to ignore their complaints. With a union, there’s more power to demand better conditions. I know not everyone supports unions, but from what I’ve learned, they can make a real difference, especially in industries like fast food, where individual workers don’t have much power on their own.

That said, I can see why unionizing in fast food is hard. This reading talks about high turnover, unpredictable schedules, and the franchise model, all of which make organizing more difficult. I think a lot of people also don’t take fast-food jobs seriously and assume they’re just for teenagers or people passing through. But the truth is, many adults work these jobs to survive, and they deserve respect and fair treatment. I used to think fast-food jobs were just temporary, too, but this reading changed my perspective. These jobs are part of a system that relies on keeping people underpaid, and that system needs to be challenged.
I also noticed how the reading talks about ideology, how certain ideas, like "if you work hard, you'll get ahead," can make people believe that low wages are the worker’s fault. But the system is set up in a way that makes it really hard for people to move up. It’s frustrating to realize that a lot of what we see as “normal” is actually shaped by powerful companies and interests. The idea that raising wages will destroy businesses is repeated so much that many people believe it without question. That’s what the book calls hegemony: when certain beliefs become so common that we stop questioning them. I think that’s why campaigns like Fight for $15 are so important, they force us to question what we’ve been told is “just the way it is.”

Overall, I fully support the demand for a $15 minimum wage and the right to unionize. Everyone deserves to be paid fairly and treated with respect, no matter what kind of job they do. This chapter helped me understand that these are not just personal problems; they’re part of a much bigger system. And if we don’t speak up or support change, then that system stays in place. The more I learn, the more I feel that fast-food workers and all workers deserve better.

# data[].attributes.body
One of these corporate brands that I consider to be relevant not just in my personal life but in the lives of the people around me as well is Starbucks. Starbucks is not just a coffee store; it has become a symbol of a specific lifestyle that embraces comfort, individualization, and self-expression. Through its branding, aesthetics, and advertising, Starbucks is a cultural pedagogue that's actually teaching consumers lessons about what it means to be a modern, conscientious consumer. To exemplify, the brand is constantly promoting values such as self-care, ethical sourcing, and global consciousness. When people buy Starbucks, they're not just buying a drink; they're participating in an experience that's socially conscious and personal.

Chapter 3 describes how culture is not just a question of personal tastes but also teaches us how to behave, what to value, and what to think is normal. Starbucks plays this role by encouraging certain patterns of consumption, like spending $6 on a daily latte or thinking of coffee shops as social hubs or workspaces. It instructs us that it's okay, even to be expected, to spend money on a regular basis on small indulgences and to tie consumption to identity and self-care. At the same time, Starbucks promotes the idea that one can have capitalism and ethical consumption simultaneously, which can be seen in its efforts to position itself as sustainable and fair-trade friendly.

However, the majority of these messages are ideological. Starbucks presents itself as a socially progressive, concerned business, but critics often point to contradictions in how it treats employees. For example, baristas may receive cut hours, minimum wage, or unstable access to benefits. While Starbucks creates the illusion of a responsible corporate citizen, workers' experiences may not necessarily reflect this rhetoric. This contradiction suggests how ideology works; it masks the contradictions beneath an agreeable, feel-good image. As discussed in Chapter 3, ideology has the effect of justifying the status quo by making social arrangements (like low-wage labor) natural or inevitable. Certain of Starbucks' messages have reached hegemony, in that they've become "common sense" concepts that aren't challenged by many. It seems normal, for example, to spend $6 on a coffee or to think of working from a coffee shop as a sign of flexibility and freedom. It's also normal to view Starbucks as a socially responsible corporation, even when there is evidence to the contrary. The notion that a corporation can be both extremely profitable and "ethical" simultaneously demonstrates a prevailing capitalist ideology that is not often questioned. As the book discusses, hegemony occurs when individuals consider certain concepts normal, even when the concepts serve corporations better than they serve workers.

In brief, Starbucks is not just selling coffee; it is selling a lifestyle. Through design, marketing, and business ethics, it teaches consumers how to behave, what to be concerned about, and how to think about themselves. For as much as these messages are positive, they also mask underlying power relations related to labor and inequality. These hidden lessons enable us to grasp the manner in which culture affects our everyday life and the way that ideology can find expression even in the simplest cup of coffee.

# data[].attributes.body
In "Caught Between the Ages," Wishard explains that we are in a great era of change where the old world, with all its familiar values, forms, and traditions, is breaking down but not being replaced with a new one that is established yet. Thus, many feel stuck in between and are unsure of what to do. Wishard uses big examples like 9/11, artificial intelligence, cloning, and the moon landing to illustrate how rapidly and unexpectedly the world is transforming. They are exhilarating and terrifying. They show us the possibility of human ingenuity but also the danger of losing way or direction. Individuals thus feel lost, as if they are in a world where nothing is real or stable anymore.

Wishard identifies three powerful forces driving this shift: globalization, technology, and changing spiritual or moral beliefs. Globalization means that cultures, economies, and people are more interconnected than ever before, but in so doing, they undermine or push aside traditional local ways and identities. Technology, in particular, is changing life at a whirlwind pace. New technologies and gizmos shape how we work, communicate, and think. But faster than the technology is evolving, our values and institutions lag behind. We can have surveillance and AI, but we still have not fully come to terms with how to address the ethical issues that accompany them. Spiritually, individuals are alienated from historic religious or moral systems and are searching for something else to give their lives significance. It all creates chaos and confusion; people are looking for where they belong in a world no longer governed by the same principles.

A related article, "Current Contradictions in Adolescent Theory" by John C. Coleman, speaks of how teens live a kind of "in-between" life. Coleman explains how adolescence is so stressful and bewildering for teens because they are not children anymore, but still not adults. They are struggling to create their identity, values, and future while coping with pressures at school, home, and society. This is what Wishard reports is happening to the world in general: we're not there yet, but we're not quite set into whatever comes next either. Both pieces show how change can be bewildering and even painful, but that they're also required for growth.

Reading Wishard's chapter was the most important thing for realizing why so many individuals today, especially the younger generations, are uncertain, anxious, or lost. Between incessant technology, changing morals, and constant world news, it is no wonder to be lost. The reading also reminded me of the opportunity we have in the midst of change. Instead of merely reacting to what's happening, we can be more deliberate about the kind of future we want to create. Wishard would seem to suggest that we don't just have to "get through" the transition; we can create it. That means asking tough questions, critically questioning technology and culture, and defining new values that more accurately reflect the world we actually live in.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) Leindner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) Leindner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.body
In Robin Leidner's "Over the Counter at McDonald's", the author examines how McDonald's organizes its workplace and how customers and employees alike are controlled through an extremely structured system. Leidner states that McDonald's is designed to be efficient, predictable, and standardized. The same experience should be had at every location, no matter where you are. To that effect, the organization uses step-by-step procedures, intensive training, and strict employee guidelines to follow. Workers have minimal freedom to act on their own. They are requested to read from a script when dealing with customers, be sunny in their demeanor, and complete work quickly and accurately as commanded. Whilst that creates a smooth customer experience, it also turns the job into an automated and uncreative task for workers.

Leidner also describes how the system affects the workers themselves. The vast majority of McDonald's workers are teenagers, older adults, or people who may not have a lot else to work on. Due to this fact, they are more likely to tolerate low wages, nonstandard schedules, and bad job flexibility. McDonald's shifts the risk of fluctuating customer demand to the employees, such as cutting the hours in off-peak times of business or asking them to work more hours during peak times. The employees are also requested to be extremely flexible, but the corporation does not give much back to them. This could lead to burnout, irritation, and demotivation. While McDonald's tries to make the work seem easy and fun, Leidner shows it to be dehumanizing and exhausting for the employees.

Customers are also included in this in-control system, although unwittingly. They are trained to order in a specific manner, select from a limited menu, and follow unstated rules, like picking up after themselves. The fast-food system prevents any kind of personal contact or individual requests since these slow down the process. Leidner recognizes that while the system is effective, it leaves no space for actual human contact. Everything is to make everything quick and predictable, even if that means individuals are being handled like machine components, both clients and workers.

A follow-up article, "A Response to 'Over the Counter at McDonald's' and Instrumental Rationality," concurs with Leidner's general conclusions. In the article, it is explained how McDonald's is focused on "instrumental rationality," that is, using the most efficient means to accomplish a goal, whether or not it causes harm to the people involved. This kind of mentality focuses on speed and control over human well-being or creativity. The article states that while the system benefits the company, it is at the expense of the workers, as low wages, low control, and repetition dominate their work. It agrees with Leidner that the environment feels dehumanizing and makes one feel like they are just following orders rather than creating something worthwhile.

This article also describes George Ritzer's theory of "McDonaldization," where the way fast food restaurants are run, with a focus on efficiency, control, and predictability, is now showing up in schools, hospitals, and other areas of society. Leidner's chapter opened my eyes to how big business affects not only how we work, but how we treat each other. It made me think about the amount of control businesses have over everyday life and whether or not we're losing something valuable in the process. It made me realize how much power big businesses such as McDonald's actually have, not just on what we consume, but on how we work and interact with others as well. It made me think about how common this kind of system is in other professions, too, where it is all scripted, controlled, and focused on speed and not quality. Fast food is easy for the consumer, but at a cost that is not apparent to the employees working behind the counter. Leidner's book taught me more about how control systems and efficiency systems can take away from authentic human interaction, and why it is a good idea to question how these systems are created in the first place.

# data[].attributes.body
In the reading from Nickeled and Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich takes on low-wage jobs to discover if it's really possible to live on minimum wage in America. Her observations as a waitress, hotel maid, and retail worker show a grim reality: many individuals are working full-time but still can't pay rent, eat, or receive healthcare. The common presumption that hard work yields stability is refuted throughout this chapter. Ehrenreich shows how the system is set in such a way that people at the bottom cannot succeed, no matter how much they work.

One of the most common issues throughout this section is invisibility and exploitation of low-wage workers. Ehrenreich portrays how workers are treated like machines to work long hours without complaining, recognition, or justice. In the housekeeping work, for instance, employees experience chronic pain from continuous physical exertion, but without proper breaks or medical care. There is no actual way forward in these jobs, only a survival cycle. Ehrenreich also discusses the way dignity is robbed not only by low wages, but by micromanaging, monitoring, and perpetual pressure to work under humiliating circumstances.

Another central concern is housing insecurity. Ehrenreich struggles to pay for housing, typically finding herself in motels or substandard, low-cost apartments that ultimately cost more in the long run. She identifies poverty as paradoxically expensive; without the money for a deposit or a steady way of getting around, people are stuck with high-cost, insecure housing. Even working multiple jobs doesn't guarantee that basic expenses are met. This creates structural inequality, as sociologists call it: barriers built into the system, not a result of individual choices.

These findings remain just as relevant now.

Another article, "Why America's Working Poor Still Can't Make Ends Meet" (The Atlantic, 2023), demonstrates that millions of Americans are still barely managing to scrape by on full-time wages. Low wages remain stubbornly low even though corporate profits have set records, and workers are still beset by rising rents, inflation, and precarious schedules. As Ehrenreich argues in the article, hard work is not the issue; the system is. It requires structural change like raising the minimum wage, providing medical care, and protecting workers' rights. This modern climate does the work of illustrating Ehrenreich's thesis that poverty is a system failure, not a personal one.

You can see these issues in everyday life. Fast food workers, cleaning staff, hotel staff, supermarket clerks, and lots of others work long hours and stay paycheck to paycheck. Others turn to second jobs, skip meals, or do without health insurance. Ehrenreich invites us to see these workers differently, not as failures, but as people doing important work under a very imperfect system. Her writing evokes sympathy and, more importantly, action.

In total, Ehrenreich's chapter illustrates how America's low-wage reality is shaped by economic systems that trap one in poverty. Her vivid storytelling brings theoretical sociology to life and into the individual. Paired with modern-day articles and common examples, it's clear: to end poverty, it takes more than saving the individual; it takes changing the systems that keep him or her there.

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

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

# data[].attributes.body
Reading Chapter 3 really made me pause and reflect on how much labor is hidden behind the convenience of everyday things, especially food. I’ve walked into fast food restaurants countless times, placed my order, and waited just a few minutes without ever thinking about the systems behind it. But this chapter pulled back the curtain and forced me to think sociologically: Who is doing the work? Under what conditions? And why is this work so invisible? What impressed me most was how the authors use fast food as an ordinary, everyday element in modern life as a way of exploring globalization, labor inequality, and corporate power. It's not just about burgers and fries. It's about how global corporations like McDonald's shape work culture, use cheap labor, and homogenize practices across the globe in the interests of efficiency. I couldn't help but think of George Ritzer's theory of McDonaldization, of how our world is increasingly driven by efficiency, predictability, and control. These seem positive at first, but the reality is that they have a tendency to lead to dehumanizing work conditions, where workers are turned into machines.

The discussion of precarity hit especially close to home. The majority of fast-food workers are youth, migrants, or marginalized individuals who get by on low wages, unstable hours, and minimal benefits. It's not necessarily a short-term "teen job"; for some, it's survival. I've never worked a fast-food job, but I have friends who have, and I see now how routinely their struggles were minimized or dismissed. Learning about alienation, or how people become disconnected from their work, their creativity, and even from themselves, helped me understand why burnout and dissatisfaction are such prevalent phenomena. I continued my learning with a supporting article titled "From Severe to Routine Labour Exploitation: The Case of Migrant Workers in the UK Food Industry" by Jon Davies. It echoed many of the chapter’s arguments but focused on food processing rather than front-of-house fast food. What shocked me was how normalized exploitation has become, especially for migrant workers. Low pay, unsafe conditions, and a lack of accountability weren’t rare; they were routine. It reminded me that the food industry is an iceberg; what we see (the service, the nice cashier) is only a fraction of what's really happening beneath.

Reading both the chapter and the article made me think more critically about the power that we have as consumers and the limits of that power. On one hand, consumer consciousness and worker-led campaigns can drive change. On the other hand, the systems are so driven by profit and global that significant change seems slow and uneven. I am left wondering: How can we demand more humane treatment of workers if we are not willing to wait a little longer or pay a little more for our food? This chapter not only informed me about fast food but also changed the way I think about work in general. From a coffee to a burger to a grocery store item, someone somewhere is working behind the scenes, most likely in challenging conditions. As I continue to study sociology, I want to pay closer attention to whose labor makes my life possible and what that says about our global society.

# data[].attributes.body
In my freshman year of high school, almost everyone in my circle of friends and even outside of it was wearing Vans shoes, especially the classic black-and-white checkerboard slip-ons. I didn't exactly care much about what kind of shoes I wore at first. But eventually, I noticed how people would comment favorably on other people's Vans, and then I felt like an outsider. It was not that someone outright told me to wear them, but I felt the pressure silently. So I did end up purchasing a pair, not because I really needed new shoes, but so I could fit in. This experience is what Chapter 5 describes as consuming social order. The chapter informs us that what we eat and where we shop teaches us to behave and conduct ourselves in a way that enables us to belong to certain social categories. Back in high school, sporting Vans was one sort of symbol code announcement that you belonged to the skater crew, the music crew, or simply the fashion-conscious students. By buying Vans, I was learning to be a member of that social world through appearance. The shoes were not shoes; they were a sign of belonging, something that expressed identity and group membership without the use of words.
The chapter also addresses how consumer goods become ways of doing identity. Vans shopping allowed me to identify with a particular style and attitude, even when I wasn't even really into skating or alternative music. It was a way of saying, "I get it.". I'm one of these." This pertains to the idea that we learn as social beings, how to dress, how to behave, and how to be viewed by others, from going shopping. In this instance, I was performing some sort of myself that I hoped would bring about a higher degree of acceptance, and it did for a time. Other individuals noticed the shoes, I got compliments, and I felt more in than I had originally. However, as the chapter finds, consumerism only provides temporary feelings of belonging. While the Vans made me feel like I belonged for a period of time, I couldn't help but notice how quickly things altered. Soon enough, others were changing to another brand or type, and I found myself swept up, thinking that I had to keep pace. That was when I realized that the sense of acceptance I felt from the purchase was real, but not very deep. It was based on externals, not myself as a person. Chapter 5 speaks about how consumerism is what keeps us in a cycle of always attempting to stay social up-to-date by consuming more, and I, for one, did feel that.

All in all, buying Vans made me feel as though I was included in something, but it also showed me how much social pressure is embedded in normal consumption. The activity taught me how products gain meaning way beyond use, and how we wear them to fit into the social order that surrounds us. Having read Chapter 5, I now understand that shopping isn't merely about choosing what we like; it's about learning to be a specific sort of person in a specific sort of world.

# data[].attributes.body
In Meyer's "If Hitler Asked You to Electrocute a Stranger, Would You? Probably," the author addresses the frightening force of obedience and authority. These pages focus on how normal, average people are able to be made to perform unpleasant or even harmful behaviors when commanded to do so by someone in charge. One of the main examples given is the prominent Milgram experiment, where subjects were instructed to deliver what they believed were painful electric shocks to another person. The majority of people assumed that only those who had sadistic personalities would proceed with such instructions, but the results showed otherwise. The majority of subjects continued to obey, although they felt uncomfortable, simply because an authority figure told them to do so. Meyer emphasizes that this obedience was not so much the product of evil, but the product of the powerful influence that structured authority, social roles, and environmental pressures have on human behavior.

One of the major concepts discussed is how people can become morally disconnected from what they are doing when faced with authority. A defense used by most of Milgram's subjects was that they were "just following orders," a replication of the way responsibility can be seen to be displaced in hierarchies. The process tends to happen gradually, with individuals agreeing to trivial requests that become increasingly serious, a psychological persuasion method known as the "foot-in-the-door" effect. As time passes, individuals become more and more ready to execute bigger and worse orders. Meyer's story suggests that, under the right (or wrong) conditions, almost anyone is capable of doing things they would otherwise consider unthinkable. This presents readers with an uncomfortable truth: evil is not always perpetrated by obviously "bad" people; it's most often perpetrated by ordinary people acting under authority.

This section gave me more to consider about how easily it is for individuals to become involved in sinister systems without even being aware of it. It led me to consider my own reactions to authority and whether or not I would have the strength to rebel if I knew that something was wrong. It also helped me understand how organizations like the military, the police, or even the workplace can sometimes encourage blind obedience instead of moral decision-making. To connect this idea to a broader context, I looked up an article by Gina Perry titled "Behind the Shock Machine," a reexamination of the Milgram experiments. Perry argues that the manner in which these experiments have been remembered isn't always accurate. Many subjects fought back or questioned what was happening, and the emotional toll was often greater than anticipated. This shows that obedience is strong, but resistance is still possible, especially when people are encouraged to think critically and question authority.

Overall, this reading made me aware of how sociology explains human behavior in organized contexts. It helped me realize that studying obedience is not a matter of condemning people from the past who obeyed someone like Hitler; it is a matter of recognizing how the same patterns can repeat themselves today if we are not careful. It reminded me that staying vigilant, educated, and outspoken is something that we all have an obligation to do, especially when authority is being misused.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading Chapter 5, "Shopping Lessons: Consuming Social Order," I was able to see that shopping is far more than just buying products. The chapter explains how shopping gives us lessons on class, status, identity, and what society says is "normal.". It had me realize that whenever I buy or even crave something, I'm adopting a social role referred to by the authors as being an "active consumer hero." That means that I'm projecting my self through my choices. Therefore, if I buy items that are ecologically sound or contribute to patronizing local stores, I think that I'm being useful and expressing my values through what I consume, drink, and wear. This section of the chapter made me realize that shopping is how we speak about ourselves, and at times even fight against mainstream norms.

But the chapter also showed that I'm never actually in control because I'm also a "consumer dupe." So many of what I want are constructed by advertisements, fashion trends, peer influence, and social norms. I can convince myself I need a new shoe because it's trendy, but then again, maybe I just think it's trendy because everybody else is being trendy or because the influencers are continuously showing photos of them. The authors talk about how shopping spaces and advertising are designed to dictate our actions and guide us toward making certain choices, yet we don't even know. One great instance of this phenomenon is in the research paper "The Impact of Conspicuous Consumption in Social Media on Purchasing Intentions". The research paper explains how social media encourages us to want more products showing status, especially luxury products. People are influenced just by seeing people's status updates of what they bought, and this makes them want the same things even though they don't necessarily require them. This ties into the chapter's idea that we're all part of a great big system of consumer culture that dictates what we think we need. Since I've read this chapter, I've become much more sensitive to how my own shopping is influenced less by personal taste, and more by non-obvious economic and social forces. I've found myself questioning exactly how much control I do have when I decide what to buy.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead 

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead 

# data[].attributes.body
In "Handling the Stigma of Handling with the Dead," William E. Thompson talks about how morticians and funeral directors handle social stigma in their job. Death is taboo or uncomfortable to society, and society passes this stigma on to those who work directly with death. Thompson accounts for the fact that funeral directors are often seen as "strange," emotionally removed, or even death entrepreneurs, creating issues on both a professional and personal level. To cope with this, they use strategies like symbolic language, using words like people "passing away" instead of "dying," or a "funeral coach" instead of a hearse, in order to reduce the emotional impact on both themselves and clients. They also employ emotional distancing and backstage humor between co-workers to assist them in coping with the sad or disturbing aspects of the work without being overwhelmed. Most also emphasize professionalism, credentials, and the sense that they provide an important service to grieving families. This serves to redefine their job from morbid to deeply meaningful and humane. Thompson's results correlate with Goffman's ideas about front-stage and backstage action. Funeral professionals present a dignified and poised public image with care, while containing emotional reactions and responses in private.

This caused me to think more about the emotional labor that happens in so much "stigmatized" work. Funeral directors aren't the only ones that have to deal with it; janitors, trauma nurses, social workers, and even fast food people have to deal with negative assumptions about what they do, even though the work they do is necessary. In the same way morticians do, a number of them also deal, either through humor, adjusting their role, or with clients' approval, they work for. Another study related to this was one conducted on Italian funeral professionals, which concluded that those experiencing stigmatization and disrespect in their work showed more burnout, but when they believed they were fulfilling something meaningful and purposeful, they were extremely resilient. That speaks very much to Thompson's contention that the way we view and talk about certain jobs can influence not just public opinion but even the psychological health of the workers themselves. Reading this reminded me that the people who help us through life's darkest moments often carry very heavy emotional burdens that are not always immediately apparent to us. It made me wonder how quickly we can judge others by the titles they hold without realizing what could possibly be the depth of professionalism and concern that lies behind them.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) Goffiman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) Goffiman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.body
In Goffman's work, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life, he explains how people present themselves in everyday life using the metaphor of a theatrical performance. He tells us how, during the context of everyday life, we are playing roles based on where we are and with whom we are there. For example, a student would be respectful and studious at school but would be boisterous and sarcastic around friends after school. Goffman calls this the “front stage”, the space where people carefully control their behavior, appearance, and words to make a certain impression. In contrast, the “backstage” is where individuals feel safe to drop their public performance and be more authentic, like venting frustrations, being messy, or expressing unpopular opinions. What's evident in this chapter is how Goffman says that individuals are not necessarily lying, but rather they're managing impressions in order to fulfill their audience's expectations. Even when we attempt to be honest, we actually determine how much to disclose and how to disclose it. This theory fits perfectly with how individuals are behaving on social media today. For example, on social media like Instagram, people tend to share mostly the best parts of their lives, holiday highlight reels, achievements, or posed selfies, but leave out anxiety, failures, or daily moments. Goffman's "idealization" explains this: we try to present ourselves in a way that conforms to cultural expectations or what we believe others want from us. Even on the pages that claim to promote authenticity, like BeReal, where individuals are prompted to post unedited photos at any time, there is still performance present. Individuals can hold off and only post or pose their backdrop when they are doing something more interesting. This means impression management does not go away. It just gets adapted based on the page and environment. Goffman also discusses how individuals labor to prevent embarrassment or "losing face" when something in a performance goes wrong, such as when a person trips in public or utters something inappropriate in conversation and quickly attempts to make light of it or rationalize it. This made me realize how much of our everyday behavior is influenced by the desire to produce a certain image. Whether it's school, work, or online, we're always reading the room and adjusting our behavior, hardly even aware of it. Goffman's work had me thinking about how much effort goes into everyday interactions and how social life is really an ongoing balancing act between who we really are and who we have to appear to be.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JBC) Chapter 10 Branding/The Self and Social interaction

# data[].attributes.subject
(JBC) Chapter 10 Branding/The Self and Social interaction

# data[].attributes.body
Chapter 10 made me realize just how much we brand ourselves every day, even when we don’t mean to. The chapter talks about how people use things like clothes, phones, brands, and social media to shape how others see them. It’s kind of wild to think that we’re all acting like our own little companies by managing our image, picking what version of ourselves to show, and using stuff we own or wear to send a message. After reading this, I started noticing how I do it too. Like, I definitely think about what hoodie I wear to school, or which pics I post online. Even the drink I order at a café or how I decorate my room says something about me; whether I’m trendy, chill, sporty, whatever.
What really stood out was the idea that taste isn’t just personal, it’s shaped by society. So when someone wears expensive shoes or uses a certain brand of earbuds, it’s not just a random choice. It’s often tied to status or trying to fit into a certain group. I see this all the time at school. People want to look like they belong, and brands are a huge part of that. But the chapter also pointed out that not everyone has the same access to those things, which is very true. Some people can afford to wear brand names or have the newest tech, and others can’t, but the way people treat you can totally change based on that.

I also related to the part about impression management, how we act differently around different people. I’m definitely more relaxed around my close friends than I am in class or online. On Instagram, I overthink what I post because I want it to match the vibe people expect. It’s like we’re constantly managing how we appear to others, and it gets exhausting. Everyone wants to be “authentic,” but we also want to be liked or accepted, and sometimes that feels like a contradiction.
This chapter helped me realize that identity isn’t just something we have, it’s something we’re always creating, with every choice we make. Branding ourselves isn’t just about showing off; it’s about survival in a world where we’re constantly being watched, judged, and compared. I’m definitely going to be more aware of how I present myself and also more understanding of how others do the same. We’re all just trying to express who we are in a world that makes that complicated.

# data[].attributes.body
I decided to venture out to Brarista's, a coffee shop that I have passed by many times and always wanted to visit. After reading Chapter 4, I wanted to study the space sociologically, and more specifically, where class, taste, and identity emerge in everyday spaces like a coffee shop. Brarista's is not just a coffee shop; they also have smoothies, pastries, and even breakfast sandwiches. The ambiance is cozy and friendly with plush couches, lots of plants, and a mix of old and new furniture. The menu was chalked up on a huge board at the rear of the counter, and the individuals behind it seemed to be very friendly and knowledgeable, especially when asked about ingredients or what to order.

I sat in a corner with my iced latte vanilla and watched the flow of customers. There was a diverse crowd: students stopping for a drink on their way to class, seniors congregating to socialize, and parents with strollers stopping to pick up smoothies. A few people were clearly regulars and called the staff members by name. Others sat alone with laptops, perhaps working or doing homework. I noticed that the drink menu varied from basic drip coffee to trendier options like matcha lattes, turmeric shots, and protein smoothies. Prices weren't cheap, with a smoothie coming in at about $9 and most specialty beverages at around $5–$10, but they weren't overly expensive either. Reflecting on what we learned in class, I could certainly see how this setting creates a certain kind of atmosphere that conveys "good taste," but in an informal and friendly way rather than in some high-end coffee shops.

Where the book had spoken about coffee as a sign of class differentiation, Brarista's seems to obliterate those boundaries a little bit. It caters to different sorts of people, not just those who have a high cultural title and are looking for single-origin pour-overs, but also those who come there for a smoothie or pastry, or even just for somewhere they can hang out. There were, however, subtle signs that implicated class and taste. For example, the people who had expensive laptops and noise-canceling headphones looked more relaxed in the environment than those who had briefly visited or were asking for a plain black coffee. I was relaxed there too, but I was also paying closer attention to how much of that relaxation is a product of familiarity with the environment.

I understand how to order a latte, I can indulge in the occasional pricey muffin, and I wear clothes that will not make me stand out. But for someone new to such a context, especially someone with little money or coming from another culture, it can be less hospitable. That led me to consider how even "welcoming" spaces are still expressive of intangible social boundaries. Overall, visiting Brarista’s helped me connect the ideas from the book to real life. It showed me how something as normal as a coffee shop is actually shaped by social forces like class, taste, and cultural identity. Next time I’m grabbing a drink, I’ll probably still enjoy it, but I’ll also be thinking about who that space is really designed for, and why.

# data[].attributes.body
After reading "Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?" by Devah Pager, I was surprised at how much it led me to think about fairness, discrimination, and second chances. The chapter revolves around a field experiment that Pager conducted to observe how criminal history affects one's opportunity for getting a job. She sent out pairs of people with nearly identical résumés to apply for the same jobs, changing only one thing: whether the person had a criminal record, and whether the person was Black or white. The results were eye-opening. White applicants with criminal records were called back more often than Black applicants with no record. That strongly suggests that prejudice and racism still reign supreme in terms of hiring practices, even sometimes above a person's past mistakes.

The extent to which a criminal record can harm a person, especially Black men, is what really got my attention. It doesn't just disappear after serving their sentence. Many people face constant rejection even when they’re trying to turn their lives around. This forms a cycle in which ex-cons can't get reliable employment, which can cause them to return to crime, not because they wish to, but because survival means they have little option. I couldn't help but think about individuals I know personally who have made bad decisions, done their time, and yet have trouble getting jobs. It doesn't seem right that society just says, "You've done your time," but continues to treat you as a criminal for the rest of your life.

This text has also made me think about my own assumptions. I now think about how what one does in their past doesn't necessarily dictate what they are doing now. I would want to know about what they've done since then, i.e., have they learned from their mistake, attempted to become better, stayed out of trouble? If the answer is yes, I believe they deserve a fair chance. I think hiring should be about someone’s present and potential, not just their past. Especially when you consider how some people are targeted more than others by the justice system in the first place. I found a policy brief from UC Berkeley called “Finding Employment After Contact with the Carceral System.” It talks about how formerly incarcerated people face major barriers to employment, not only because of stigma from employers but also because of laws, background check policies, and a lack of support systems. The article also says many people with records don't have access to job networks or know how to search effectively. This aligns with Pager's work and indicates that the issue is far greater than poor decisions. It's about systems that still punish individuals after their time is up.

I believe if we want to live in a safer, better, and more equal world, we need to reconsider the way we treat individuals once they've done time behind bars. Personally, I hope that in whatever job or role I may be in the future, I can be someone who does not judge others based on their worst mistake, but by what attempts they have made at learning and improving.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H)  Henslin, Doing Sociological Research

# data[].attributes.subject
(H)  Henslin, Doing Sociological Research

# data[].attributes.body
Reading "Doing Sociological Research" enlightened my view of sociological research. Beforehand, I thought sociology was mostly people just saying theories or concepts formed by observation or opinion. But Henslin illustrates how sociologists actually do their research in a systematic, step-by-step process, similar to scientists studying subjects like biology or chemistry. It starts with the formation of a specific, focused question regarding some facet of society, like why people are doing something in a particular way or how problems within society arise. Then, sociologists research what is already known on the topic and begin to define variables to be studied. One of the things that really struck me was the importance of operationalizing variables. Basically, turning abstract ideas like "happiness" or "poverty" into something measurable. Without this, there’s no way to collect consistent or useful data. He also discusses some of the methods sociologists use to gather data, including surveys, interviews, participant observation, and even experiments.

Each of these strengths and weaknesses. Surveys reach large populations but may not yield much depth in people's experiences. Interviews and fieldwork yield rich, subtle data but take more time and often involve fewer numbers. What really struck me was the emphasis on validity and reliability, making sure the study actually measures what it's supposed to, and that it would produce the same findings if replicated. Lastly, the section is also a reminder of how essential ethical considerations are in doing sociological research. Researchers must protect the privacy of participants, ensure they give informed consent, and avoid causing harm. This made me remember that research on humans is not all about getting answers, but it's all about treating the participants with respect and being a custodian of their experiences and narratives. Generally, this reading taught me about the gravity and prudence of the research process, and the amount of thought that goes into even the most minute aspects of a study.

To connect this to an example, I have read a 2024 Scheytt and Pflüger article discussing ethical issues in qualitative sociology. The article brings Henslin's points to life using examples of how today's researchers continue to encounter issues like protecting participants' privacy or dealing with emotional topics during interviews. It reinforces the notion that ethics are not simply a list of rules but a fundamental part of doing good, respectful research. Having those ideas written out in actual-world research made me understand that the book's teachings are not speculative; this is how research is done these days.

# data[].attributes.body
In the appendix Advertising and Research methods, the authors explain how advertising can be used as a powerful tool in order to discover more about society through several different sociological methods. We all come across something every day that is advertising, either on social media, TV, billboards, or even in music or influencer content. But ads are more than just tools for selling products; they also send powerful messages about what it means to be successful, pretty, powerful, or even “normal.” For this reason, advertising is a great subject for sociologists to study. The appendix explains that researchers look at the three main parts of advertising that they focus on. How ads are made (production), what ads show and say (content), and how people interpret and react to ads (reception).

One can study each aspect using different methods. Content analysis, for example, allows researchers to identify patterns and trends, including how frequently races or genders appear in specific roles. Discourse analysis looks at the deeper messages of the words or images in ads, like how a perfume ad might be selling ideas about femininity or luxury. Then there are interviews or focus groups, which enable researchers to learn how people respond to and interpret advertisements socially or emotionally. Finally, production analysis looks at the behind-the-scenes activity in particular, who produces ads, what their decisions are, and how does business or culture affect those decisions. Through the use of these various approaches, sociologists are able to reveal how ads influence our concepts and mirror our culture. The appendix's main point is that there is no single way of conducting research on advertising. Sociologists often combine methods to get a fuller picture of the way in which advertisements reflect and shape our society. A follow-up article titled "What is an Advert? " by Robert Cluley and Elizabeth Nixon confirms the statement above. It illustrates that adverts are not just images or movies; they are complex things with legal, economic, and cultural meanings. As the textbook explores, this article illustrates that to truly grasp advertising, we need to look at it from many different angles. Learning about these methods enables students not only to understand ads more, but also the world around us.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JBC) Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian perspectives

# data[].attributes.subject
(JBC) Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian perspectives

# data[].attributes.body
One food that's a totem for me is mac and cheese, and particularly baked mac and cheese, that my family makes during the holidays. It's always homemade and is a staple at our family gatherings. It's one of those comfort foods that just feels like home and makes me feel close to my loved ones. It's not merely food; it's members of my family who make me feel like I'm home. But if I look at it from a Marxist point of view, I realize that I never really think about where the ingredients are actually being derived from. I don't think of the laborers who made the ingredients, or big companies that profit from them. The dish appears to be a simple, intimate meal, but there is actually an entire system of production and labor that goes into it. So even if it tastes like a homemade family favorite, it's also integrated into the larger economic process that most of us are not aware of.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This baked mac and cheese is a family favorite recipe, loved by both children and adults. It uses a combination of cheeses, layered in the dish as well as melted into a rich and creamy cheese sauce, for the ultimate in cheesy deliciousness! Perfect for a comforting dinner or as a holiday side dish! Looking for other comfort food dishes? Check out my Homemade Sloppy Joes, Creamy Broccoli Cheddar Soup, Crockpot Meatloaf, and Homestyle No-Boil Mashed Potatoes!
BAKED MAC AND CHEESE

Baked mac and cheese. It's nearly the universal comfort food, and there are SO many variations! In fact, I almost didn't post this recipe, as there are SOOOO many mac and cheese recipes available, and most people already have their favorite way of making it.

Of course, there's no "right" way or "wrong" way, so I'm here sharing the way I like to make my mac and cheese (the way my family loves it too).

HOW TO MAKE MAC AND CHEESE

If you've never made homemade mac and cheese before, it can seem a bit daunting. But don't worry, we'll break it down and take it step by step!

Boil the pasta, drain.

Make the cheese sauce by combining a fat (butter), and starch (flour), then whisking in the milk products.

Cook the sauce until it's nice and thick.

Add in shredded cheeses, stir well.

Combine cheese sauce with cooked pasta.

Transfer half of the mac and cheese to a baking dish, sprinkle with more shredded cheese.

Top with the rest of the mac and cheese, top with more shredded cheese.

Bake and prepare to thoroughly enjoy!

COOKING TIPS FOR BAKED MAC AND CHEESE

Boiling the pasta - cook the pasta less than you normally would. I like to boil my elbow pasta for between 4 and 5 minutes. The pasta will continue to cook in the oven, and you don't want it to get mushy.

Use room temp liquids - if you can... cold liquids generally take longer to thicken than warmer ones. I usually set my milk and half and half out while the water for the pasta is coming up to a boil.

The cheeses - use your favorites! Our personal favorites are the cheddar and gruyere used in this recipe, but you can be very creative with the cheese selection here. Mozzarella, gouda, smoked gouda, swiss, monterey jack, colby jack, colby. There are plenty of reader comments down below the recipe that talk about the cheeses they used!

Shred your own - I know it's a pain, and it's SO tempting to use the pre-shredded cheese in the bags. But those bags of cheese contain a starchy substance that keeps the cheese from clumping... which also prohibits it from melting as well as it should.

VARIATIONS OF MAC AND CHEESE

Bacon - if you love bacon, feel free to add some crispy, crumbled bacon to the topping, or even inside the mac and cheese as well!

Stovetop - if you'd prefer not to bake this mac and cheese, you don't have to! Make sure you boil your pasta until al dente (check the packaging for correct times), and you'll only need about 3 - 3 1/2 cups of cheese total. No need to layer the pasta and cheese, just add all the cheese to the sauce, then combine with the pasta.

Different Toppings - I'm a huge fan of the cheese layer on top, since it gets nice and crispy, but we also love tossing 1 cup of panko with 2 Tbsp of melted butter and using that as a topping. 1 cup of crushed Ritz crackers with 2 Tbsp of butter work amazingly well too!

Different Baking Times - the recipe calls for a lower baking temperature and time, but most of the time I find myself adjusting that based on my family's tastes. I like to bake this mac and cheese at 350 F degrees for 30 minutes, then broil for 2-3 minutes to get that glorious cheesy "crust".

MAKING MAC AND CHEESE AHEAD OF TIME

Make as directed (but do not bake), transfer to baking dish and cool completely. Cover tightly with foil and refrigerate 1-2 days ahead.

Before baking, let dish sit on counter for 30 minutes.

Bake at recipe temperature for 25-35 minutes, until hot and bubbly.

As a caveat, this recipe, as with most mac and cheese recipes, loses some of it's creaminess when made ahead. This dish has been tested when made right away, which yields the best results. I would increase the amount of sauce slightly if you need to make this recipe ahead of time.
STORING MAC AND CHEESE

Any leftovers need to be refrigerated and covered tightly. Mac and cheese can be stored this way for 3-4 days.

To reheat, stir in a little bit of milk or cream and microwave partially covered with plastic wrap. Stir often as it reheats.

SPECIAL EQUIPMENT USED IN THIS RECIPE

Box Grater - remember, the best mac starts with freshly shredded cheese!

BE SURE TO SCROLL DOWN TO CHECK OUT OTHER READERS' COMMENTS!

AND DON'T FORGET, IF YOU'VE MADE THIS RECIPE, LEAVE A COMMENT AND PLEASE GIVE IT A STAR RATING!

Did you make this? Be sure to leave a review below and tag me @the_chunky_chef on Facebook and Instagram!

(hover over # to adjust)

This baked mac and cheese is a family favorite recipe, loved by children and adults.
Post has been updated in September 2019 with new photos and additional information.
Want to save this recipe for later? Click the heart in the bottom right corner to save to your own recipe box!

1. Please feel free to add additional seasonings per your tastes, this is a base recipe that you can change up to make your own. Garlic powder, onion powder, ground mustard, smoked paprika, and hot sauce are some favorites of ours to add.

2. To get the 4 cups of cheddar, use a 16 oz block of cheddar and shred.

3. To get the 2 cups of gruyere, use as close to an 8 oz block of gruyere as you can (different brands have different sized blocks), and shred.

Mac and Cheese can be made ahead:

Make as directed (but do not bake), transfer to baking dish and cool completely. Cover tightly with foil and refrigerate 1-2 days ahead.

Before baking, let dish sit on counter for 30 minutes.

Bake at recipe temperature for 25-35 minutes, until hot and bubbly.

Preheat oven to 325 degrees F and grease a 3 qt baking dish (9x13"). Set aside.

Bring a large pot of salted water to a boil. When boiling, add dried pasta and cook 1 minute less than the package directs for al dente. Drain and drizzle with a little bit of olive oil to keep from sticking.

While water is coming up to a boil, shred cheeses and toss together to mix, then divide into three piles. Approximately 3 cups for the sauce, 1 1/2 cups for the inner layer, and 1 1/2 cups for the topping.

Melt butter in a large saucepan over MED heat. Sprinkle in flour and whisk to combine. Mixture will look like very wet sand. Cook for approximately 1 minute, whisking often. Slowly pour in about 2 cups or so of the half and half, while whisking constantly, until smooth. Slowly pour in the remaining half and half and the whole milk, while whisking constantly, until combined and smooth.

Continue to heat over MED heat, whisking very often, until thickened to a very thick consistency. It should almost be the consistency of a semi thinned out condensed soup.

Remove from the heat and stir in spices and 1 1/2 cups of the cheeses, stirring to melt and combine. Stir in another 1 1/2 cups of cheese, and stir until completely melted and smooth.

In a large mixing bowl, combine drained pasta with cheese sauce, stirring to combine fully. Pour half of the pasta mixture into the prepared baking dish. Top with 1 1/2 cups of shredded cheeses, then top that with the remaining pasta mixture.

Sprinkle the top with the last 1 1/2 cups of cheese and bake for 15 minutes, until cheesy is bubbly and lightly golden brown.

FIVE CHEESE VARIATION:

Replace cheese amounts with the following:

2 cups cheddar cheese, shredded

1 cup Colby cheese, shredded

1 cup Muenster cheese, shredded

1 1/2 cups Gruyere cheese, shredded

1/2 cup mozzarella cheese, shredded

FOR A CRUNCHIER TOPPING AND FIRMER CONSISTENCY:

Prepare recipe as directed but bake at 350 or 375 F degrees for 20-30 minutes. Broil at the end of baking for approximately 2-5 minutes, until golden brown and crunchy.

The Chunky Chef is not a dietician or nutritionist, and any nutritional information shared is an estimate. If calorie count and other nutritional values are important to you, we recommend running the ingredients through whichever online nutritional calculator you prefer. Calories can vary quite a bit depending on which brands were used.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Creamy Baked Mac and Cheese (Contest-Winning!) - The Chunky Chef

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deliciously rich and gooey, this baked mac and cheese is creamy, comforting, and PERFECT for the holidays, as well as a comforting family dinner!

# data[].attributes.body
After reading "Sympathy in Everyday Life", I realized that sympathy is more complex than I had thought. It is not just about feeling sorry for somebody; it actually depends on the person's behavior and how others view them. It seems that when someone is going through something bad, the people around them decide whether or not they "deserve" to be sympathized with, based on their behavior. If they seem like they’re exaggerating or playing the victim too much, people might not feel bad for them. But if they seem strong, they often get more support. This made me think about how people sometimes don’t share what we’re going through because we’re afraid of being judged or not taken seriously. Clark also mentions how sympathy can be made to feel good or helpful when one is giving it, yet taking it can make a person feel uncomfortable or weak. I've definitely felt that way in the past when people were trying to comfort me. I appreciated it, but also felt a little uneasy. This reading made me understand that sympathy is not just an emotion, but also a social interaction with implicit rules that we all follow without even realizing it.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) Hall and Hall, The sounds of silence

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) Hall and Hall, The sounds of silence

# data[].attributes.body
When I read The Sounds of Silence, it really makes you think about how much we say without using words. Hall and Hall explain that things like nods, facial expressions, posture, eye contact, personal space, and gestures are all powerful ways of communicating, kind of like their own secret language. For example, Hall gives a funny scene of a guy named Bob at a regular coffee spot: the clerk says, “The usual,” and Bob just nods, and that’s enough, no words needed. Later, when a big man sits too close, Bob just gives him a dirty look, and the other guy moves. They are still using no words, yet the message is clear. They also talk about how eye contact works differently depending on the person and how some people might find staring rude, while others read it as engagement or respect. Then they bring up the idea of personal space and how too-close contact might make someone uncomfortable, even though it can be totally normal in another form. The chapter also includes a story about a couple from different backgrounds. One is reserved and values distance, while the other is warm and affectionate, and they struggled until they realized their communication styles were shaped by culture. Reading this made me think about how I use nonverbal cues all the time, like when I roll my eyes or freeze up in class or step away when someone steps too close. It’s kind of wild how we’re always sending out messages through silence without even noticing.

# data[].attributes.headline
(H) Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

# data[].attributes.subject
(H) Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

# data[].attributes.body
After reading "Body Ritual Among the Nacirema", I was surprised at how strange the rituals of the Nacirema people seemed until I realized it was actually describing American culture in a satirical manner. Miner talks about daily activities like brushing teeth, visiting the doctor, and using medicine, but in a way that makes them sound like rituals. The way they talked about brushing teeth, going to the doctor, and beauty routines made it sound like the people were hurting themselves. For example, the part where they go to the “holy-mouth man” (which sounds like a dentist) made it seem like a painful and scary experience. It made me think about how everyday habits can look totally different or weird when viewed from an outside perspective of our own. It made me reflect on my own routines and how we often take them for granted as normal, even though they could seem extreme or strange to someone from another culture. I found an article on Cultural Studies Now that explained how Miner’s point was to challenge the idea that our culture is more logical or better than others (Cultural Studies Now article). This helped me understand how important it is to try to understand other people's behaviors and beliefs without judgment. The reading was interesting in a weird way at first, but in the end, it really made me think about how I see my own culture and the way I view others.

# data[].attributes.body
Reading Chapter 2 on food and culture made me think about how much meaning can go into something as simple as eating. When you think of food, you usually think of health or taste, but this chapter showed me how meals are also about identity, culture, family, and even social class. One story that stood out was the example of the Pakistani-Canadian family. The mom cooked traditional food with pride, but the son saw it as oily and not at all healthy. This shows how even within families, cultural values can clash, especially when people grow up balancing different cultural influences. Another story that stuck with me was Sabrina’s. She brought rajma and rice to school and got teased very bad that she started bringing sandwiches to fit in. This made me sad, but it also showed how food can become a source of embarrassment just because it’s “different.” I also liked the idea from the chapter that culture is like a “tool kit,” and we all pick and choose what food practices to follow. But it also made me think about how our choices are shaped by things like ads, influencers, and especially money. I recently read an article in Food & Wine about how pantry staples like olive oil and chili crisp have become trendy status symbols just because influencers promote them. It's crazy to me how something so basic can suddenly become a way to show off taste or wealth. This tied in perfectly with the chapter’s point about how food reflects inequality. Not everyone can afford to eat trendy or healthy food, especially if they live in a food desert. Overall, this chapter helped me see food in a new way. It’s not just about what we eat, but also about who we are, what we value, and how society treats us based on what’s on our plate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Squeezable Olive Oil to Chili Crisp — How Pantry Staples Became Status Symbols

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Graza squeezable olive oil to chili crisp and tinned fish, our pantries have become places to show off ‘cute’ packaging and brand names. Here’s how influencer culture, capitalism, and an increasingly chaotic world have turned our countertops into flex zones.

# data[].attributes.body
When I think back to one of the first things I ever bought, it was a Beanie Baby, a small stuffed animal that I begged my parents to let me buy with my own saved-up money. At the time, I just thought it was cute, but I also wanted it because everyone else at school had one. After thinking about this discussion, I can see that this wasn’t just a simple choice of they are cute. Bigger social forces influenced it, and I didn’t even realize it at the time. For example, there was a huge Beanie Baby craze going on, and kids were treating them like gold or even trading them. If you had the popular ones, people would think you're cool. That made me want to join in, not just because I liked stuffed animals, but because everyone else had one. The media and toy stores were hyping them up, which also shows how marketing can play a big role in shaping what we think is valuable or cool at the time. When you really think about it, the first thing you ever bought can actually say a lot about how we learn our behaviors. For me, that one stuffed toy helped me understand things like consumer culture, peer pressure, and social identity. I just thought I wanted it because it was cute, but looking back, I probably wanted it because everyone else had one, and I didn’t want to feel left out, along with thinking it was a cute toy. What felt like a small decision of mine wanting to buy something was actually tied to advertising, social trends, and the desire to fit in. Thinking about this from a sociological point of view made me see that even something as simple as buying a stuffed animal could be connected to bigger things in society. It’s not just about what we buy, it’s about what those choices say about who we are, what’s going on around us, and how we fit into the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Mills talks about the sociological imagination, which is the ability to look at our personal problems and understand how they connect to bigger issues in society. He points out that we often think our struggles are just personal, like dealing with school or not being able to find a job, but they’re actually linked to larger forces. He states that by using the sociological imagination, we can see how things like history, culture, and society shape our lives. He also used the example that if someone’s having a hard time finding a job, it might not be just because they’re not qualified, but also because of the economy ot the job market, or how industries are changing. This reading is to understand that our problems are not always just about us, but that they’re often connected to bigger things going on in society. This can help us see the world differently and think about how we can make things better.
This idea really hit home for me. I used to think all my stress from school was just something I had to get through because it was part of being a student. But after reading about the sociological imagination, I realized that the pressure I feel isn’t just my fault, but it’s part of a bigger system where students are expected to do a lot without always getting the support we need. It made me feel less like I was the only one struggling and helped me see that things could be different if the system changed a bit.

# data[].attributes.body
In Berger’s Invitation to Sociology, he talks about how sociology is all about being curious about everyday life. He states that sociologists aren’t just interested in big events but that they’re fascinated by everyday things like conversations, routines, and social roles. What makes sociology different is the way it looks deeper into these things and tries to understand what’s really going on beneath the surface. Berger says it’s kind of like getting culture shock, but in your own world. You start to see things differently, like questioning why people act the way they do or why certain social rules exist. Once you start thinking this way, you can’t really go back to seeing things the same way. I’ve also noticed this in my own life. After learning about this perspective, I have started paying more attention to how people interact around me. It makes me think more about how society shapes us, even in small ways. Berger’s ideas are related to a study by Georgiana Bostean and Lisa Leitz called Using Sociological Images to Develop the Sociological Imagination. In this study, students used pictures from everyday life to practice thinking sociologically, just like Berger describes. The study found that this helped students connect sociology to their own experiences and changed how they saw the world. Both Berger and this article show how sociology isn’t just something you read about, but that it’s a way of thinking that helps you understand real life better. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0092055X211054572.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JBC) Chapter 1: Jeans/Discovering Sociology

# data[].attributes.subject
(JBC) Chapter 1: Jeans/Discovering Sociology

# data[].attributes.body
In Chapter 1, jeans were used to illustrate how sociology is applied in everyday life. Although they might seem like just a normal piece of clothing, jeans actually have a history and a bigger meaning. Jeans originally were tough pants for workers, but now everyone wears them. This chapter showed me that something like jeans can connect to many things: culture, fashion, and the global economy. It made me see in easy terms that what we like and don't like, such as what we wear, is often shaped by larger social forces we don't always notice. The jeans you choose to wear show what social meaning you convey, or maybe how they were advertised to entice you. I mainly feel comfortable shopping at places like Target or H&M, where they have simple styles and affordable prices. This can come from my social location of growing up in middle class and looking for places where I don't have to spend a lot of money on expensive clothes. I sometimes feel uncomfortable or out of place when I shop in a more high-end store. This is an example of how class can shape the kind of stores we feel comfortable in. This chapter stood out to me because it made me see jeans differently about something I use every day. I never thought about jeans as anything more than what they are, but now I see how they are actually related to things like trends, advertising, and where they are made. Starting the chapter like this and using a relatable example that everyone can relate to made sociology feel more real and less like just a theory, since it showed me how everyday stuff has deeper meanings. Starting the book this way made it easier to understand what sociology is all about.

# data[].attributes.body
This book talks about sociology as the study of human groups and the patterns that influence people's lives. Sociology looks at how society affects individuals, as opposed to biology, which studies the body, or psychology, which examines individual minds. Henslin discusses the sociological perspective, which means looking beyond our own experiences and recognizing that issues we frequently perceive as personal are the result of broader social forces. He could make use of C.Wright Mills' concept of the social imagination, which has us to relate more general societal problems, like the economy or the educational system, to more personal ones, like failing to find employment. Even though we may not always be aware of it, social class, gender, and race are significant determinants of opportunities and decisions. I never understood how much my life is influenced by society. I believed that my behavior, my wardrobe, and even my plans were entirely my own choices, but now I realize that they are impacted by the standards and values of the society I live in.

# data[].attributes.body
This book is not just about sociology but about consumer culture and thinking sociologically about stuff in our everyday life. This book is written to be entertaining and relatable. In each chapter I will engage with a certain item or phenomenon, imagine why it's important and to think about how it relates to my life. I will learn about key sociological concepts to better understand the social world. At the end of the chapter, there will be three key thinking frames to help explore the same topic from different angles. There will also be questions to analyze and help develop new tools to see the world around me.

# data[].attributes.body
I am taking this class to get my Associates Degree and then get into the Radiology program. My overall goal is to become an X-Ray tech.