• In satisfying, our basic curiosities about the world, we have developed two parallel sets of scientists each identified by its distinct subject matter: natural sciences, and social sciences.

• Natural sciences: the intellectual and endeavors designed to explain and predict the events in our natural environment. Natural sciences are divided into specialized fields, such as biology, geology, chemistry, and physics. The special fields are also divided into more highly specialized areas like how biology is divided into botany and zoology and geology into mineralogy and geomorphology, etc.

• social sciences: focuses on the social world, and examines human relationships. Like the natural sciences, social sciences are also divided into specialized fields based on their subject matter. These divisions are anthropology, economics, political, science, psychology, and sociology with history sometimes included. The social scientists are also divided further more into specialized fields, for example how anthropology is divided into cultural and physical anthropology, etc.

• culture includes a group: 1) Artifacts. 2) structure, its patterns. 3) ideas and values. 4) forms of communication, especially language.

• Sociology has many similarities to the other social sciences. For example, like history, sociologists also attempt to establish the social context that influences people.

• While there are similarities to the different social sciences, there are also differences like how sociologists tend to focus on the present and they also focus on a group of people instead of an individual.

• The social sciences and their focuses: 

• History: focuses on past events, historians attempt to establish the social context of a certain event, the people, idea of social institution, social movements, or other events that may have influenced the outcome of a certain event.

• Political science: the study of the way that people govern themselves, how do people attain ruling positions, how do they maintain them, and what are the consequences of their actions for those that they govern.

• Economics: concentrate on a single institution, the study of production and distribution of material goods and services of society.

• Anthropology: the study of understanding, culture, and a people‘s total way of life.

• psychology: the study of mental processes, what occurs in the brain or the mind.

• sociologists are more observant when it comes to examining social groups and their structures

• Sociology studies human behavior and they also focus on people‘s pattern, relationships, and overall aspects of human behavior.

• Sociologists focus on two principal aspects of life in society. 1) group membership  2) face-to-face interaction- what people do when they are in another’s presence.

• structural sociology: focuses on a group, structural sociologists are focused on determining how membership is in a group, such as religion, influences of people‘s behavior and attitudes, how they vote or how education may affect how they stand on social issues.

• People do not have to belong in an actual “group” to be counted, sociologists simply group together people who have similar characteristics, such as height, age, weight, education, etc. this is known as aggregates, people who are grouped together for the purpose of social research because of character characteristics they have in common.

• interactional sociology: the focus is placed on individuals.

• statistically oriented sociologists: attempt to determine numbers to represent people’s patterns of behavior.

• Quantitative sociology/sociologists: sociologists who are statistically oriented stress that proper measurement by the use of statistical techniques is necessary if we are trying to understand human behavior.

• qualitative sociology, the focus on how people construct their world, health, develop their ideas and attitudes, and how they communicate with one another.
  

• Little is known about their origin but tradition states that they came from the east.

• The nacirema's fundamental belief is that the human body is “ugly” and that its natural tendency is to debility and disease. 

• The medicine men must be rewarded with substantial gifts, they do not provide curative potions for their clients, they decide what ingredients should be and then write them down in an ancient and secret language. This writing is only understood by the medicine men and herbalists who provide the “required charm”.

• The nacirema have a fascination with the mouth, the condition of which is believed to have a supernatural influence on all social relationships.

• If they did not have rituals of the mouth they believed their teeth would fall out, their gums would bleed, their jaws would shrink, their friends desert them and their lovers reject them. 

• In the exorcism of the “evils of the mouth” the client is tortured, teeth are even gouged out so that the supernatural substance can be put into the mouth properly. 

• Part of the rite includes scraping and lacerating the surface of the face with a sharp instrument, women even bake their heads in an oven for about an hour

• (personal note): it is interesting to see how much torture these people willingly put upon themselves because of their culture and because of how they see their close friends and family performing these rituals. 

• In the latipso temples which are temples used to “treat” very sick patients, no matter how ill someone may be– the guardians of the temples will not admit a client if they cannot give a rich gift to the custodian. 

• Magic wands, and substances are put into the patients mouths as a way of “treatment” and in some cases patients are even stabbed in the flesh by magically treated needles. 

• These temple ceremonies of “healing” may even kill the patient, despite that risk of death it still does not decrease the people's faith in the medicine men.

• There are ritual fasts to make fat people thin and ceremonial feasts to make thin people fat. Still other rites are used to make women's breasts larger if they are small and smaller if they are large.

• Breast shape is idolized because women go from village to village to permit the natives to stare at them for a fee.

• Ask yourself while you’re reading how all the stuff that surrounds us came to occupy space in our drawers, our homes, and in our collective consciousness.

• Why do we want the stuff we want and how does it relate to our sense of self as well as our role as a member of various social groups like families, communities, ethnic groups, and nations.

• Chapter breakdown: 1) imagine why this consumer item is important 2) how does it relate to your life or the people around you? 3) Key, sociological concepts, thinkers, theories and research methods will be introduced that will allow you to understand the item that the chapter is discussing better, and it will help you understand the social world more deeply.

• Thinking frames: material and cultural, structure and agency, macro and micro.

• Sociologist's main focus is not just on why people do what they do, but it’s in the action of itself.

• The types of questions sociologists may ask themselves may be things like: “ what are people doing with each other here? What are their relationships to each other? How are these relationships organizing institutions?”

• Sociologists investigate things like communities, institutions, and activities that you may read about in everyday newspapers.

• The categories of sociologist analysis are refinements of categories by how other people live:, like power, class, status, race, ethnicity.

• The first wisdom of sociology: things are not what they seem.

• Sociology is an individual pastime because of how it may interest some people while it may also bore others.

• Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.

• sociological imagination: enables its possessor to understand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals. It enables the professor to take into account how individuals during their daily experience often become falsely conscious of their social patterns and positions.

• awareness of “the promise” and the questiond asked: 

• 1. What is the structure of this particular society as a whole? What are its essential components, and how are they related to one another? How does it differ from other varieties of social order? Within it, what is the meaning of any particular feature for its continuance and for its change?

• 2. Where does this society stand in human history? What are the mechanics by which it is changing? What is its place within, and its meaning for, the development of humanity as a whole? How does any particular feature we are examining affect, and how is it affected by, the historical period in which it moves? And this period-what are its essential features? How does it differ from other periods? What are its characteristic ways of history-making?

• 3. What varieties of men and women now prevail in this society and in this period? And what varieties are coming to prevail? In what ways are they selected and formed, liberated and repressed, made sensitive and blunted? What kinds of "human nature" are revealed in the conduct and character we observe in this society in this period? And what is the meaning for "human nature" of each and every feature of the society we are examining?

• troubles occur within the character of the individual and within the range of his immediate relations with others, they have to do with himself, and with those limited areas of social life of which he is directly and personally aware.

• issues have to do with matters that transcend these local environments of the individual and the range of his inner life.

• indifference: people are neither aware of any choice, values nor experience any threat.

• uneasiness/anxiety: people are unaware any cherished values, but still are very much aware of a threat.

• nonverbal communication is significant in conveying feelings and attitudes. (such as facial expressions and body language)

• Preverbal language- your posture, gestures, facial expressions, costume, the way you walk, and even your treatment of time and space to material things.

• Signs a person may want to terminate the conversation: a shift in their body position, stretching/uncrossing their legs, bobbing their foot, diverting their gaze from the person speaking, and fidgeting. 

• “Talking and listening are so intricately intertwined that a person cannot do one without the other.” pg.111

• 3 ways the eyes are used to communicate: dominance vs, submission, involvement vs, detachment, and positive vs. negative attitude.

• 3 levels of consciousness and control: the flirting blink, intimate nosewrinkling squint

• People are very sensitive when it comes to their personal/spatial bubble if someone stands too close their first instinct would be to back up.

• In office, at meetings, in restaurants, our bubble keeps changing as it adjusts to the activity at hand.

• Four main distances in business and social relations: intimate, personal, social, and public. 

• Touch is also an important part of communication- a light touch, a firm touch, a blow, a caress, etc.

• How to learn body language: observe and imitate people around you.

• We live within an elaborate system of rules regarding feeling and expressing sympathy.

• Sympathy: feeling sorry for another person or with another person.

• Plights: a dangerous, difficult, or otherwise unfortunate situation.

• The plights society considers “sympathy worthy”: loss of a loved one, illness, divorce, loss of one’s job, crime victimization, car trouble, noisy neighbors or fatigue. 

• Sympathizers are influenced by peoples social statuses. 

• what constitutes a sympathetic character: social statuses

• common reactions to plights: facial expressions, postures, tone of voice appropriate to sympathy display- erasing smiles, knitting eyebrows, sitting up straighter, speaking in “concerned” tones.

• Rules of sympaty etiquette: 1) do no make false claims to sympathy 2) do not claim too much sympathy 3) claim some sympathy 4) reciprocate to others for the gift of sympathy 

• Three thinking frames: 1) the material and cultural elements of social life 2) the tension between social structures and human agency 3) the importance of looking at the social world through small scale (micro) perspectives/large scale (macro) standpoints.

• Developing a sociological imagination allows us to see connections between “private troubles” and “public issues”. 

• Consumer culture: A historical type of society in which the satisfaction od daily needs is accomplished through the acquisition and use of “commodities” (goods that are produced for exchange and are on sale on the market.) 

• Capitalism: when a person is not acquainted with a subsistence way of life, but will deeply feel familiar with life in a market economy.

• Social structure: enduring patterns and institutions that organize social life.

• “We must see the strange in the familiar” - Peter Berger. We should be asking questions like “why are things organized this way? How did it come to be this way? How might it be different? 

• The pathways of industrial capitalism emerged alongside sociology as a discipline. 

• Conspicuous consumption: consumption of high status, visible luxury goods by wealthy elites to signal their power and distance from the working class.

• Agency: the ability of individuals to make decisions and take action within their lives.

• Microsociological approach: focuses on social interactions and meaning making.

• Macrosociological approach: focuses on how society works at the institutional, national, and global level. 

• Globalization: where people, ideas, and commodities often seem to move seamlessly and quickly across neighborhoods, cities, and national borders. 

• Theoretical perspectives: offer different ways of approaching the same empirical issue.

• Commodity fetishism: useful for understanding our relationship to food.

• culture: systems of meaning that are shared by members of a group.

• Deviance: evaluation of a social norm

• Norms: informal but widely accepted ways of doing things, which guide her every day behavior.

• Social sanctions: in formalsignals that you have deviated from the norm, and that work to encourage social conformity.

• Values: beliefs held by individuals or groups about what is right and wrong, important and unimportant, desirable and undesirable.

• Values often can inform our social norms and can also guide us in our interactions, and decision-making.

• Cultural relativism: understanding, an individuals, beliefs, behavior, feelings, and worldwide view in relation to his rehear culture.

• Ethnocentrism: when people see their own culture as normal and inherently superior.

• Social control: the process of regulating individuals behavior to ensure that it conforms to group expectations.

• Microsociological processes are shaped by broader, macrosociological dynamics.

• Empirical: scholarship that aims to document what is, without saying anything about what ought to be.

• A normative approach to food studies that considers responsibility means two things, 1) the professional sociologist, and the sociology student must think about their own perspective on issues of food, justice, inequality, and sustainability, and must also reflect on what questions will shed light on these issues. 2) food sociologist must pay attention to efforts to struggle for greater food justice.
  

As I've grown older, I feel as if I don't remember a whole lot about my childhood especially between the ages of 1-6. Which is why when reading this question it really got me thinking and I really like this question because there is one core memory of mine that I still somehow remember out of all the other memories that I can't seem to remember. It was when I was about 4 years old. My mom always enjoyed going to flea markets because there was so much to buy and for so cheap. I remember her giving me money-- I can't remember exactly how much but I do remember that when I bought this thing the women selling it gave me back 1$ in change and I was so happy with it. The item I was so excited to purchase "by myself" was a makeup set, the ones made for kids with the sparkly eyeshadows and the foam brushes and the sheer lipsticks. I loved it a lot, but like any other kid I moved on from it fast when I found something new that fascinated me. The only "social pressure" I can think about that possibly made me purchase this was seeing my mom do her makeup, like any typical kid would I was most likely trying to imitate what my mom was doing.

Sociological perspective:

Looking back on it now as I’ve gotten older, I can see how this purchase was shaped by more than just a personal desire. Using a bit of sociological imagination, I now realize that my choice was most likely influenced by my social location, especially my gender and age and family structure. As a young girl, I was often surrounded by cultural messages that associated femininity with make up and beauty. Watching my mom do her makeup was probably one of my biggest influences. I often admired her and wanted to imitate the things that she did in her routines. That’s a form of social learning, like how children absorb behaviors modeled by their parents or caregivers. The makeup set wasn’t just a toy, but a symbol of connection and identity, shaped by the norms of girlhood that I was often shown at home. class also played a role. Because of how affordable flea markets were and how accessible they were, they also offered a space where small purchases could feel big. My mom giving me money to spend on my own was a moment of empowerment, but also a reflection of our family values, like how I was able to find joy in such a simple thing. Mass media also played a more subtle role too. Even if I wasn’t watching my mom do her make up, the packaging,  the product, the colors, and the glitter that it’sin still would’ve reeled me in because of how it already had the appeal perfect for young girls. The more that I think about this purchase now, and knowing what kind of questions to ask myself in a sociological manner, I’ve realized that this memory proves to me how early experiences in children are often shaped by the world around them. By things like family, norms, economic access, and cultural messages.

Sympathy might seem like just a feeling, but it’s actually something we learn how to show based on social rules. According to Henslin, there’s a whole system around when we’re expected to feel sympathy, how we express it, and who “deserves” it. We’re taught to respond to certain situations—like illness, death, or losing a job with concern, and we use things like tone of voice, facial expressions, and posture to show we care.

But we don’t owe sympathy to everyone equally. A person’s social status and how close they are to us affects how much sympathy we feel and how much we’re expected to give. If someone’s going through something hard but we don’t know them well, or if they’re seen as responsible for their own problems, we might not feel the same pressure to respond. There are also boundaries, like not claiming too much sympathy or faking it that help keep things fair and respectful.

So yeah, sympathy is emotional, but it’s also social. It depends on the situation, the relationship, and the unspoken rules we’ve learned about when it’s okay to care and when it’s okay to step back.

In terms of age, the crowd was mostly adults in their 30s to 50s, with a few college-aged people working on laptops, which is likely because this Starbucks is very close to Delta college. I didn’t see any kids or teens besides myself. Class was a bit harder to judge, but based on clothing, devices, and the fact that people were buying $6 drinks without hesitation, I’d say most customers were middle to upper-middle class. Race and social dynamics were subtle but noticeable. The baristas were diverse, Black, Latino, and white, but the customers were less so. Overall, this Starbucks felt friendly, but not very deeply connected. People coexisted more than they interacted. And while no one was “excluded”, some groups just seemed less likely to stay and engage.

• Two major activities of sociologists: 1) conducting empirical research 2) constructing a theoretical base

• Empirical: based on objective observations

• Sociologist cannot draw conclusions that are based off guess work, hunches, custom superstition, common sense or how they would like the world to be.

• Sociologists must gather info that represents: peoples attitudes/behaviors

• Sociologists research methods: experiments, interviewing, and documents of secondary sources

• Sociologists often combine research methods

• Theories: a basic point- how we make sense out of life- all of us want to know the meaning of the things that happen to us but facts never interpret themselves. In order to find this meaning, we place ourselves into a conceptual framework– we take a “fact” and compare it with what we know about that kind of thing. We then use what we know to interpret that fact.

• Doing this gives us an understanding of: what that event or fact of life means. Kit doesn't matter if our understanding is right or wrong, the point is that we all do this as a part of our everyday lives.

• We feel the need to know how events are related to one another, which is called “everyday theorizing”-- so technically we are all theorists.

• The difference between sociological theory and everyday life theory: sociology theory is more rigorous

• A “theory” is a conceptual framework that interprets facts, it shows how facts are related to one another. 

• The three dominant theories of sociology: 

• 1) symbolic interactionism: how we construct meanings, how we use symbols to communicate with one another and how symbols are the foundation of our social world. 

• Main themes if symbolic interactionism: 

• 1) human beings have a self: we have the capacity to think, talk about, and to reflect on our own actions, future actions, even our thoughts and feelings about our actions.

• 2) people construct meanings and act on the basis of those meanings: When we reflect on our experiences we interpret what happens to us.

• 3) people take into account the possible reactions of others: We are aware of how other might react to something that we are thinking about doing, and we take those anticipated reactions into account as we make decisions about what to do. 

• Central to symbolic interactionism: is the principle that to understand peoples behavior we must understand their symbolic worlds.

• Functionalism: a theory that believes society is an integrated system made up of many parts– in which each part fulfills a function that helps keep society going.

• If a part fails it becomes dysfunctional and creates problems for other parts of the system.

• Conflict theory: society is viewed as a system in which its many parts in competition and conflict

• “society is more like an imbalanced machine running wildly out of kilter and ready to break apart”

• the results of this conflict can show up as: racism, sexism, social class conflict.

• common sense: a kind of knowledge not based on formal investigation, but on ideas that we pick up from our groups mixed with abstractions for our own experiences.

• rape has ongoing effects, it can trigger fears and anxieties, and it can make women distrust men.

• common sense tells us that one reason men rape is because of the revealing clothing that some women wear, but common sense also tells us that men who rape are  sexually deprived.

• but researchers have found different ideas as to why men, rape, for example, some men who raped don’t care about what a woman is wearing, most of them don’t even care who the woman is, but to them, the woman is simply an object for lust, drives for power, and exploitation, and sometimes frustration and anger.

• Researchers have also found that rapist may or may not be sexually deprived the same as with men who do not rape. For instance, many rapist have wives or girlfriends whom they have ongoing sexual relations with.

• Due to the amount of inmates that are incarcerated, it leads to a lot of people returning to communities and searching for work. The barriers these men faced in reaching economic self-sufficiency, are compounded by the stigma of minority status and criminal record.

• (the study discussed in this section of reading is made to assess whether the effect of a criminal record differs for black and white applicants)

• The study described: 

• involves the use of four male auditors, two blocks and two whites. 

• The testers were 23 year-old college students from Milwaukee, who were matched on the basis of physical appearance and general style of self presentation. 

• Objective characteristics that were not already identical between pairs, such as educational attainment and work experience, were made similar for the purpose of the applications. 

• By varying which of the pair presented himself as having a criminal record, unobserved differences within the pairs of applicants were effectively controlled. 

• The audit pairs were randomly assigned 15 job openings each week, the white pair and the black pair were assigned separate sets of jobs, with the same race testers applying to the same jobs. One member of the pair applied first with the second applying one day later. 

• A total of 350 employers were audited during the course of the study, 150 by the white pair and 200 by the black pair.

•  additional tests were performed by the black pair because black testers received fewer callbacks on average, and there were fewer data points with which to draw comparisons.

• after the job applications were completed, the testers, then filled out six page response forms that coded relevant information from the test. Important variables include included: type of occupation, metropolitan status, wage, size of establishment, and race and sex of employer. (the testers wrote narrative, describing the overall interaction and comments made by employers related to specifically race or criminal records.)

• One of the testers in the study went to a trucking service to apply for a job as a dispatcher, the tester was given a long application, including a complex math test. When the test returned their application in, the secretary brought it back to the office for the supervisor to look over so that an interview could perhaps be conducted. After the secretary came back out and the supervisor had a chance to look over the application more thoroughly. The tester was done, told that the position had already been filled. This was not an infrequent occurrence, often testers reported, seeing employers levels of responsiveness change once they glanced at criminal record questions. The results that this tester faced clearly showed that criminal records closed doors when it comes to employment situations.

• this trend may not be true among all employers or all situations. There are some employers who seem to prefer workers who have been recently released from prison. One owner actually told the tester that he liked hiring people who had to come out of prison because they tend to be more motivated and I’m more likely to be hard workers.

• So, a criminal record is not an obstacle in all cases, but on average it tends to be and affects employment.

• figure 6.2: shows the percentage of callbacks received for both categories of black testers related to those for whites. Only 14% of Blacks without criminal records received callbacks, related to 34% of white non-criminals. Even whites with criminals received more favorable treatment (17%)  than blacks without criminal records (14%). 

• these percentages prove that race continues to play a dominant role in shaping employment opportunities equal to or greater than the impact of a criminal record.

• associations between race and crime affect interpersonal evaluations.

• In several interactions documented by some of the testers on three serpent occasions, black testers were asked in person whether they had prior criminal history while none of the white testers were asked about their criminal histories.

• blacks are less than half as likely to receive consideration by employers, relative to their white counterparts, and black non-offenders fall behind even whites with prior felony convictions.

• blacks are much more likely to be incarcerated than whites.

• The fact that a criminal record severely limits employment opportunities, particularly among blacks, suggests that these individuals are left with few alternatives.

This section of reading was definitely very fascinating to read about, because many factors about having a criminal record were discussed, factors that I have never questioned or thought about. One key thing that I realized, as I read through this section was how unfair the job world can truly be, especially for those who have been to prison, and even more so if they’re black. The study used 4 men, 2 black and 2  white, who applied with similar resumes. One in each pair said they had a criminal record. But when it came to the black applicants that didn’t have records, they were still treated worse than white applicants who did have records. That hit me really hard because of how the criminal record wasn’t even the biggest issue, just being black was enough to get fewer callbacks. That shows how deep racism still runs in society, even in something as basic as applying to a job. One example that most stuck with me was when a black tester applied for a dispatcher job. At first things seemed normal, and there could’ve been a potential interview, but once the employer saw the criminal record question, everything changed and the job was suddenly “already filled”. That kind of switch up seemed to have happened a lot, and it made me think about how people can be judged before they even get the chance to prove themselves and their character. what also stood out to me was how black testers were asked about their criminal history more often than white testers. That’s not just unfair, it’s a sign that people assume things based off race. Even when the testers were dressed professionally, had a good resumes and presented themselves well, those assumptions still got in the way. There was one employer who said he liked hiring people who had just gotten out of prison because they were seemed to work harder. This was really surprising to me because it felt like an exception, not a rule. Most of the time, having a record and being black just made things more difficult. This reading connects to what previous sections in Henslin's book discussed. Like how systems like the job market and the criminal justice system work together to keep certain people down. It’s not just about one bad decision, it’s also about how hard it is to move forward when society keeps closing doors and opportunities for someone. Honestly it made me think about how many people never even get a chance to show who they really are.

• Theories of the Self: Cartesian Ego (philosophical view): The self is innate and isolated; full self-understanding comes from introspection.

• Sociological view: The self is shaped through relationships and social interactions—not just personal reflection.

• Symbolic Interactionism: A micro-sociological theory focused on everyday interactions.

• Identity is built through communication and shared meanings.

• We learn who we are by interacting with others and interpreting their reactions.

• Cooley’s Looking-Glass Self:  We imagine how others see us. We imagine how they judge us. We develop feelings about ourselves based on those imagined judgments

• Mead’s “I” and “Me”: “I”: The spontaneous, impulsive part of the self. “Me”: The socialized part that understands norms and expectations. The “Me” develops through interaction with significant others (family, peers). Over time, we internalize the “generalized other” society’s expectations.

• Goffman’s Dramaturgical Theory: Life is like a performance; we manage impressions.

• • Frontstage: Public behavior, carefully managed. 

• Backstage: Private self, less controlled.

• Impression management: The work we do to control how others see us.

• Consumer Culture & Identity: People use brands and products to express identity.

• Consumer choices signal values, personality, and group membership.

• Even “anti-brand” styles (like thrift or vintage fashion) are part of identity performance.

• Social Media & Self-Presentation: Platforms allow users to curate their identity.

• Posts, likes, and comments shape how people see themselves and others.

• Online identity is often edited and selective like a highlight reel.

• Identity as Social & Cultural:

• Identity is not fixed it shifts depending on context and audience. We have multiple identities (student, sibling, athlete, etc.). These identities are connected to social roles, group membership, and cultural norms.

• Authenticity & Branding: “Being yourself” is encouraged, but often shaped by trends and expectations. Authenticity can become a brand—people try to look “real” or “relatable.” Consumer culture influences how we define and display our “true self.”

Chapter 10 made me think about how much our identity is truly shaped by things that we may not always necessarily notice whether that’s the clothes we wear, the brands we buy, and even how we display ourselves on social media. It’s easy to say phrases, such as “be yourself” but this chapter revealed to me how we are constantly influenced by the people around us and the social culture we live in. The idea of the “looking glass self” stood out to me the most. It’s not just about how we look at ourselves, it’s about how we think others see us, and how that changes the way that we act and display our selves. I realize that’s often what I do, even small things like the clothes I wear for school or what I post online is shaped by how I think others would respond, and what they’d like to see. It’s not fake. It’s more of just me trying to feel like I belong and fit in. This chapter also talks about how we tend to perform our identity, like we’re on a stage. That made a lot of sense to me, because I know that there’s a version of myself that I show in class, but also another one that I show to my close friends, and even a different one when I’m posting something on social media. It’s not that any of those versions are technically lies, they to me just are different sides of myself, depending on the situation and the people that I’m around. Goffman's idea of front stage and backstage behavior helped me understand that a bit better as well. what also stood out to me is how consumer culture plays a huge role in all of this. We use brands and products to say something about ourselves, even if we don’t realize it in the moment. Even when people are trying to appear as different, they’re still following a pattern, just a different one. Social media makes that a lot more intense, because of how we get to choose of what parts of ourselves we get to show on the posts that we upload as we get feedback through likes and comments. That feedback can shape how we feel about ourselves, and how we see ourselves, which connects back to symbolic interactionism. It’s not just about self expression, it’s also about managing impressions and trying to feel more understood. This chapter really helps me realize that identity isn’t just personal. It’s also social. We build it through things such as expectations, culture, and interactions. While consumer choices might seem small they’re actually a bigger part of a system that influences how we see ourselves and how others see us. It made me think more deeply about the everyday stuff that I don’t usually tend to question.

• Social interaction is like a theatrical performance; people are actors presenting themselves to an audience.

• A “performance” includes all activity by an individual meant to influence others’ impressions.

• Individuals use appearance, setting, and manner to construct a “front” that aligns with social expectations.

• The “front stage” is where people perform roles for others; the “back stage” is where they can relax and drop the act.

• People manage impressions through impression management, trying to control how others perceive them.

• Performers use props, scripts, and rehearsed behaviors to maintain their desired image.

• Audiences interpret performances based on cues, even ones the performer may not intend to give off.

• “Expressive control” is necessary because people constantly give off signs, even when not actively performing.

• Mistakes in performance—like poor posture or inappropriate clothing—can disrupt the intended impression.

• Roles can be performed sincerely (believing in the act) or cynically (just playing the part for a goal).

• Social teams (like coworkers or classmates) collaborate in performances, supporting each other’s roles.

• Discrepant roles exist—people who are present but not part of the performance, like outsiders or spies.

• Communication shifts depending on whether someone is in front of an audience or among fellow performers.

• The theory emphasizes that identity is not fixed—it’s shaped by context, audience, and performance.

• Funeral directors and morticians face social stigma because they work directly with death, which many people find uncomfortable or taboo.

• Society tends to avoid conversations about death, making those who work with the dead seem mysterious or even creepy.

• Funeral workers often experience status inconsistency—they perform a respected service but are socially distanced because of the nature of their work.

• To manage stigma, they use techniques of neutralization, such as:• Framing their work as helping families through grief.

• Emphasizing the professionalism and dignity of their role.

• Using humor privately to cope with emotional stress.

• They practice impression management by controlling how much they reveal about their job in casual social settings.

• Many funeral workers downplay or avoid discussing the more graphic parts of their work to maintain social comfort.

• Emotional labor workers must stay composed and supportive while dealing with intense grief and death.

• Funeral professionals often create boundaries between their personal and professional lives to protect their own mental health.

• Goffman’s dramaturgical theory/how funeral workers perform roles and manage impressions in front of different audiences.

• Cultural attitudes in the U.S. tend to sanitize or hide death, which increases discomfort around those who deal with it directly.

• Funeral directors often redefine their identity as caregivers or guides, rather than just handlers of corpses.

• Shopping is a social activity, not just an individual or economic act.

• Consumer behavior reflects and reinforces social class: what, where, and how people shop signals status and cultural capital.

• Shopping spaces are socially organized to include some groups and exclude others.

• Retail environments shape behavior through design, layout, and atmosphere to guide spending and movement.

• Shopping teaches social norms, people learn how to behave, dress, and interact in consumer spaces.

• Gendered dimensions of shopping frame it as feminine leisure and emotional labor, while men’s shopping is seen as functional.

• Racialized surveillance occurs in stores, where people of color may be disproportionately monitored or profiled.

• Shopping is tied to identity work, consumers use purchases to express who they are or aspire to be.

• Consumption is morally judged shoppers are evaluated for being frugal, excessive, ethical, or wasteful.

• Retail labor is undervalued and invisible, despite its emotional and physical demands.

• Shopping is linked to citizenship and belonging, being a “good consumer” is often equated with being a responsible member of society.

• Political dimensions of consumption emerge in choices like ethical, local, or sustainable shopping, but these are shaped by privilege and access.

The recent passing of Charlie Kirk has caused lots of intense controversy to rise. And this isn’t just because of who he was, but because of how people have responded to his death. Some mourn him as a strong and powerful political leader, who stood firm in his beliefs. while others believed that he “deserved to die”, especially because of his history of controversial statements, surrounding things like gender, race, and general global conflicts. What’s most shocking to me is how quickly people were able to have the mental capacity to mock his death, and say that he deserved to die. Some celebrated his death, not because of personal things, but simply because Charlie’s beliefs didn’t align with theirs. But there were also others who may not have had the same beliefs as Charlie, but still believe that no matter how much they disagreed with him, he did not deserve to die and wishing death on him is something that crosses a moral line. From a sociological perspective, this controversy to me reveals how deeply people have tied political identity to moral worth. Charlie Kirk was known for making comments that many often found offensive, especially in regards to gun control, transgender rights and the war in Gaza. So when Charlie passed, people didn’t just react to the loss of a person, they also reacted to what Charlie symbolized. To some people he was seen as harmful, so that meant his death felt like some sort of justice. For others, it was a moment to reflect on how far we in society have come to normalizing, cruelty, and lack of empathy. This kind of reaction from people shows how emotional people can get when it comes to politics. It’s not just about politics anymore. It’s also about identity, values and belonging. When someone who often led to a lot of controversy like Charlie Kirk and his beliefs, it becomes a sort of test of what people believe is seen as “deserved”. Some argued that Charlie didn’t deserve their empathy because of how he showed no empathy to others, especially when it came to kids and families living in Gaza, who are displaced and killed. It’s definitely a very powerful emotional response, but it also raises questions about whether we are losing the ability in society to separate such disagreements from dehumanization. Social media has made this controversy even louder, people were so angered about Charlie’s beliefs that since he’s died so many memes, and jokes have been surfacing the Internet mocking his death. People are turning grief and outrage into entertainment. This reminded me of symbolic interactionism, like how people are using symbols, such as memes in public figures to express their identity and values. In this case, specifically, Charlie’s death became a symbol of political victory or moral failure, depending on what person you ask. This anger has reached even academic spaces. In the link above, a Fresno State lecturer reportedly said that Charlie Kirk’s death was deserved which led to backlash and suspension. This moment shows how political speech is being voiced not just simply online, but in professional places like work places and classrooms as well. It also expresses how people respond when moral boundaries are crossed, especially in public. Overall, all of the reactions to Charlie’s passing aren’t just about Charlie, they’re about society. These reactions have shown how polarized we’ve become, how quick we are able to judge and how hard it is for people to hold both empathy and accountability. Sociology helps to see that these reactions are shaped by things like emotion, culture, and power, not just personal opinions.

• Alienation in the Workplace:

• Fast-food workers often experience alienation due to repetitive tasks, lack of control, and low wages.

• Karl Marx’s concept of alienation is used to explain how workers are disconnected from the products they make and the process of production.

• Standardization and Deskilling:

• Fast-food jobs are highly standardized, meaning tasks are broken down into simple, repetitive steps.

• This leads to deskilling, where workers don’t need specialized knowledge or creativity to perform their roles.

• Emotional Labor:

•  Workers are expected to manage their emotions and present a cheerful attitude, even under stressful conditions.

• This is a form of labor that isn’t physical but still demands effort and control.

• Precarious Employment:

• Fast-food jobs are often part-time, low-paying, and lack benefits or job security.

• These conditions reflect broader trends in the global economy toward precarious work.

• Global Commodity Chains:

• Ingredients and labor in the fast-food industry are sourced globally, connecting workers and consumers across borders.

• This highlights how everyday products are tied to global systems of production and inequality.

• Mobility of Capital vs. Labor:

• Capital (money, investment) moves freely across borders, while labor (workers) is often restricted by immigration laws and economic barriers.

• This imbalance benefits corporations and disadvantages workers.

• Racialized and Gendered Labor:

• Fast-food work is disproportionately done by racialized and gendered groups, especially women and immigrants.

• These patterns reflect systemic inequalities in access to stable, well-paying jobs.

• Ideology of Individualism:

• The fast-food industry promotes the idea that hard work leads to success, even when structural barriers exist.

• This ideology can obscure the realities of exploitation and inequality.

• Resistance and Agency:

• Despite difficult conditions, workers sometimes resist through unionizing, protesting, or finding creative ways to assert dignity.

• Sociology examines both the constraints and the possibilities for change.

This chapter helped me see how fast-food jobs are more than just low-paying work, they’re part of a global system that takes advantage of people. Workers are expected to smile and act happy, even when they’re tired or treated unfairly. That’s called emotional labor, and it’s real work that often gets ignored. The jobs are also super repetitive and don’t let people be creative. That’s what Karl meant by alienation, when workers feel disconnected from what they do. Most fast-food workers don’t get benefits or stable hours, and a lot of them are women, immigrants, or people of color. That shows how race and class affect who ends up in these jobs. Even though companies say hard work leads to success, the system is built to keep workers stuck. Money and products move easily across borders, but people don’t. That’s not fair, and it shows how power works in the global economy.This chapter made me realize that something as normal as fast food can reveal a lot about inequality and how society treats labor.

• Ehrenreich’s Purpose: 

• She wanted to see if someone could actually survive on minimum wage in America.

• To test this, she worked low-wage jobs like waitress, maid, and Walmart employee.

• She used participant observation, meaning she lived the experience herself to study it.

• What the Jobs Were Like:

• The work was physically exhausting and mentally draining.

• Managers were strict and controlling workers had very little freedom.

• Even full-time jobs didn’t guarantee enough money to live on.

• Workers had to act cheerful even when they were stressed or treated badly.

• Housing Struggles:

• Rent was way too expensive for what she earned.

• She couldn’t find safe, affordable housing on her wages.

• Many low-wage workers lived in motels, cars, or shared crowded space

• Daily Survival:

• She skipped meals or ate cheap fast food to save money.

• Healthcare wasn’t an option, getting sick meant just dealing with it.

• Transportation was unreliable and made getting to work harder.

• Big Takeaways:

• Working hard doesn’t always lead to success, meritocracy isn’t real for everyone.

• Middle-class people often don’t understand what low-wage workers go through.

• The system is built in a way that keeps poor people stuck.

• Workers feel disconnected from their jobs and the value they create (alienation)

• Her Reflections:

• She knew she had privilege—she could quit anytime, unlike real workers.

• She was surprised by how hard it was just to survive, even while working full-time.

• She wants readers to rethink how they view poverty and low-wage labor.

This section of reading made me realize how hard it is to survive just off of minimum wage, even when a person is working a full time job. Throughout this section, Barbara didn’t just discuss poverty, she lived through it. She worked different jobs such as cleaning houses and waitressing to see what it was like for those who were low wage workers. She noticed how the system makes it difficult to the point where it feels impossible to get by with minimum wage no matter how much hard work is put in. From a sociological perspective, this is an example of structural inequality. Its not because people are not trying or being lazy, its because things like food, rent, and basic needs cost more than what these jobs pay their workers. Even when Barbra worked multiple jobs, she still wasn’t able to afford a decent place to live. Barbras experience connects to Marx's idea of alienation because of how at every job she worked at, she felt as if she was simply seen as a person who does tasks, not a person who has value. She had to put on an act and smile even at times when she was treated badly and felt exhausted. That kind of emotional labor can be draining, and it shows how workers are disconnected from the meaning of their work. Another thing that stood out was how class affects how people see each other. Barbra knew she had privilege, and that she was able to leave whenever she wanted,  but the people she worked with didn’t have that same option as she did. They were stuck, and most of society doesn’t seem to notice them. It made me think about how easy it is to ignore people’s struggles when you’re not living them. Overall, this reading made me question the idea that “hard work pays off.” I question this now because of how Barbra worked hard, but the system didn’t reward her. It made me realize that poverty isn’t just about the  money, its more about power, respect, and being seen. Sociology helps us understand that these problems aren’t just personal, they’re social.

• Leidner studies how McDonald’s trains and controls its workers.

• Focuses on how routines and rules shape the job of taking orders and serving food.

• Uses sociology to show how even fast food jobs are influenced by bigger systems.

• Rationalization (from Max Weber): McDonald’s makes everything efficient, predictable, and controlled.

• Standardization: Tasks are broken into steps so anyone can do them the same way.

• Scripted interactions: Workers follow set phrases and routines when talking to customers.

• Limited decision-making: Employees don’t get to make choices—they follow instructions exactly.

• Workers are trained to act cheerful and polite, even when they’re tired or frustrated.

• There’s little room for creativity or personal expression.

• Employees are constantly monitored and evaluated.

• The job can feel repetitive and disconnected from real human interaction.

• Fast food jobs show how companies use control to manage both workers and customers.

• The setup makes workers feel replaceable, like parts of a machine.

• This connects to alienation, workers don’t feel connected to the work they do.

• Even simple jobs are shaped by social forces like capitalism and bureaucracy.
  
  

• We’re living in a transitional era

• Society is caught between the fading values of the 20th century and the emerging but undefined spiritual and cultural frameworks of the 21st.

• Material progress hasn’t solved the crisis of meaning

• Despite advances in technology, economics, and science, many people feel spiritually adrift and disconnected from deeper purpose.

• Traditional institutions are losing influence

• Structures like religion, family, and community no longer provide the same moral guidance or social cohesion they once did.

• Rapid change creates identity confusion

• Individuals struggle to define themselves in a world where norms, roles, and values are constantly shifting.

• There’s a global “cyclone of change”

• Wishard describes this moment as a worldwide upheaval, political, cultural, and spiritual that challenges old paradigms.

• The age demands ethical and spiritual renewal

• Rather than retreating into nostalgia or nihilism, Wishard calls for a reawakening of personal responsibility and cultural imagination.

• Hope lies in conscious transformation

• He urges readers to become active participants in shaping a new era, one grounded in meaning, integrity, and shared values.
  

• Coffee & Social Meaning:

• Coffee is more than a drink, it’s a symbol of identity, class, and culture.

• What kind of coffee you drink (instant, Starbucks, artisanal) can signal social status

• Bourdieu’s Theory of Taste:

• Taste isn’t just personal, it’s socially shaped.

• People use taste to distinguish themselves from others, often unconsciously.

• “Good taste” reflects cultural capital, not just quality.

• Conspicuous Consumption:

• Buying expensive or trendy coffee can be a way to show off status.

• Even if someone doesn’t love the taste, they might drink it to fit in or feel elite.

• Ethical & “New” Consumerism:

• Some consumers choose fair trade or sustainable coffee to express moral values.

• This is part of “new consumerism”, buying things that reflect identity and ethics, not just function.

• Coffee Spaces & Class Performance:

• Cafés aren’t just places to drink—they’re stages for performing class.

• Think: laptop at a local roastery vs. drive-thru at Dunkin’—each tells a different story.

• Sociological Imagination in Action:

• Coffee helps us see how everyday choices are shaped by larger social forces. It’s a perfect example of how consumption reflects and reinforces inequality.

What this chapter taught mean is that coffee isn’t simply just a drink it’s actually a symbol of class and identity. In this chapter, Johnston and her co-authors explain how our coffee choices can reflect our social status. By using bourdieu’s theory of taste, it explains how “ good taste” isn’t natural, It’s learned. People often use coffee as a way to express their social class, whether it’s a fair trade brew or a six dollar latte, it sends a message about who they are and what their values are like. Even ethical choices like purchasing sustainable coffee can be part of this whole display of performance. This is called new consumerism where purchases are reflected based on image and morals. Cafés in general have became stage stages for this “performance” because of how some signal privilege, productivity, and other routines and necessities. This chapter helped me better see how every day habits are not as simple as they seem, but in reality are shaped by deeper social forces. Coffee has become a way to express self identity, but also to reinforce inequality.

• Poverty Serves Functions for the Non-Poor:

• Poverty isn’t just a problem, it benefits society, especially the wealthy and middle class.

• Gans uses a functionalist perspective to show how poverty helps maintain social order.

• Economic Roles:

•  The poor do “dirty work”, low-paying, dangerous, or undesirable jobs others avoid.

• They keep wages low and reduce labor costs, which benefits businesses and consumers.

• Social & Cultural Functions:

• The poor serve as scapegoats, blamed for social problems and used to reinforce norms.

• They help define what’s “normal” by showing what happens when people don’t follow rules.

• Political & Structural Benefits:

• Poverty supports bureaucracies like welfare systems, which employ middle-class professionals.

• It stabilizes the economy by absorbing unemployment and keeping inflation in check.

• Critical Insight:

• Gans isn’t defending poverty, he’s exposing how inequality is sustained because it serves powerful interests. His message: poverty persists not just by accident, but because it’s useful to others.

• students see other students getting bullied, but they don’t say anything because they’re afraid of the bullies social status

• people described the girl who attempted as kind yet did nothing—why? 

The movie “A Girl Like Her” tells the story of Jessica, a kind student who attempts suicide after being bullied by Avery, a popular girl at school countless times. What’s most heartbreaking is how many students saw it happening and still  didn’t have the bravery to speak up. They weren’t just ignoring it, they were also afraid. In sociology, this connects to status hierarchies and social norms. Avery had the amount of power she did because of her popularity, and people didn’t want to risk their own place by standing up to her. In high school, popularity can act like social currency, it can protect some and isolate others. Even though students described Jessica as “kind,” they still didn’t help her. That shows how kindness isn’t enough when someone’s been labeled as “weak” or “different”. Labeling theory also helps explain this. Once Jessica was seen as a target, that label had stuck. People didn’t question it, even if they knew her personally. The fear of being next was what kept them silent. This movie shows how bullying is more than just one person being cruel, it’s a whole system of people, one that rewards power and punishes vulnerability. 

1. Im asian and European.

2. I made that decision through biology because my dad is Spanish and my mom is Cambodian. 

3. I learned what race I was through word of mouth, I never did an ancestral test because it honestly wouldn’t have done anything for me. Sure it would be cool to know but it doesn’t benefit me more than it costs me. I really started knowing my race through paintings and sculptures throughout my house and asking my relatives about their history and where it came from.

4. It would be through biology. The fact that the mitochondria stores maternal DNA is the determining factor of your ancestry. If you want a more plane answer, the country your ancestors originated from.

5. People can take a guess of what race you are through biological features. If you have straight thick hair you are probably Asian. If you have darker skin then you are probably somewhat African. If you have thick eyebrows and a lot more hair then many, you are probably Indian. The list goes on.

Response 2 (Alex):

1 - i’m mexican.

2 - Because my parents are from méxico and because my parents are from mexico means i’m also mexican.

3 - My parents told me where they’re from, when I was in 4th grade I started learning about countries and different languages people speak across the world.

4 - I decide what race people are by asking them where they’re from, for example, earlier this year i met my close friend named “caleb” and I asked him what race he is and he said “African american”

5 - People can decide what race I am by asking where are my parents from and i’ll tell them they’re from Mexico which makes me Mexican.

Response 3 (Zyrena):

1. I am Hispanic. 

2. I know that I am Hispanic because my parents and grandparents are from Mexico. I made that decision because I grew up with my family speaking Spanish around me and experiencing many Hispanic traditions. 

3. I learned what race I was from my family around me and the things I saw. I grew up eating many traditional Mexican dishes.  My family always spoke about their pasts in Mexico and how they got to the U.S. Some early messages I’ve received about race were that everyone is different and not everyone saw certain races in a positive light. People would make hurtful comments towards a group of people just because of their race. I started to see race as something people judge you for. 

4. When I look at someone I notice what their skin color, hair, facial features and how they talk. If they speak another language, like Spanish or Chinese, I would assume they are Hispanic or Asian. Although, I know It’s best not to assume someone’s race before you get to know them. 

5. Many people decide what race I am pretty easily because my name is a Spanish name (Zyrena) and I live in an area that predominantly Hispanic. I think I look Hispanic as well because whenever I am at a store people speak Spanish to me without question. I never got told I look like a different race. It depends on who you meet and their first impression of you.

Response 4 (Angelica): 

1. American Indian (the Apache tribe )  

2. I know because my skin color I’m brown, and it wasn’t really a decision I made 

3. I learned I was American Indian because I kinda just assumed because of my mom’s culture she taught me her culture at a young age so I learned why it was so important . Some of the early messages were from my mom and my grandmother they were pretty big on telling me and my siblings the history behind our race 

4. Tbh I don’t really decide what race people are I feel like that’s something one should define themselves. 

5. I’m not sure, I feel like people just make assumptions based on how I look for example, like in kindergarten kids used to think I was Chinese just because of my tiny eyes but I have no Chinese blood in me.

Response 5 (Jose):

1.  I’m Latino specifically Hispanic

2. I know because I was born in Honduras and so was my family my ancestry’s from Honduras and Spain

3. I learned what race was around 4 when I came to the US that’s when I really started to understand it

4. I usually just ask but if not I kinda go off stereotypes

5. People usually assume my race from stereotypes too or because I speak Spanish

Response 6 (My response):

1. I am Mexican American.

2. I know that I'm a Mexican American because my family comes from Mexican roots from Tijuana and Michoacán, it runs all throughout my family’s ancestry. I figured since people like my mom, dad, and grandparents are from Mexican roots I am as well, so i guess i could say that helped make my decision on what race I am.

3. I learned what race I am mainly by asking my mother, she often told me that all of her family roots are from Mexico. Some early messages I received about race are that people often assume race. For example if people hear me and my family speaking spanish they automatically assume we are from Mexican roots.

4. In all honesty I tend to assume peoples race based on their accents, skin color, or by stereotypes— but I usually assume only when I'm too afraid to ask the person, especially if they are someone I am not familiar with. But usually I would go and ask the person directly. 

5. I assume other people assume my race as well in a similar way, by looking at my skin color and what languages I speak. It's not the most accurate because for example a lot of people assume I'm some other race and not Mexican because of my pale skin and because of how rarely I speak Spanish. 

Race is, in simplest terms, a way that society groups people based on characteristics like hair, skin, color, facial features, and where their family comes from and what their family roots are. It’s not simply about biology, it’s also about the person's language, culture, and how people treat them. After reviewing the responses to the questionnaire, a majority of us mentioned how we learned our race firsthand from our families, through things like food, traditions, or stories where our parents and grandparents are from. Some of us also mentioned how people tend to assume our race based on looks and even how we talk, even if they’re wrong.

What does it mean to say that race is socially constructed?

Saying that race is socially constructed means that race isn’t just something that a person that a person is born with, it’s something that society teaches you to see and understand. It’s built through things like stereotypes, experiences, and the way that people react to you. For example, in our responses, some of us mentioned how people like to assume our race based on our skin color or what language we speak. Others also mentioned how they learned race through family, school, or by even being judged by others. That shows how race is mostly shaped by the world around us, not just by our DNA. So even though race feels real it actually seems more of something that society uses to define a person. That’s why people have different ideas on what race means and why it doesn’t always match up with biology.

This chapter made me think about how much women have to fight to be seen as equals, even in places where loyalty and teamwork are supposed to matter the most. This whole idea that women can serve their country and still will not be fully trusted or respected, stood out to me the most. It shows how deeply gender roles are built into society, even within the military, which is supposed to be a place that’s all about strength, skill, and commitment, not gender. What I found most interesting was how women have to prove themselves on multiple occasions just to be seen as capable. It reminded me of how that happens in regular life too, like at jobs or in schools, where girls sometimes feel like they have to work harder to be taken seriously by people. This whole pressure to fit into a “masculine culture” made me think about how unfair it is that women are often judged for either being seen as too soft or too tough. It’s like there is no in between where they can just be themselves and people will still be happy. From a sociological perspective, this chapter really connected how society shapes gender expectations. The military is just one example of how institutions often reflect the same gender inequalities that exist in any other place. It made me also really think about how slow real change can be, but also how powerful it is that women still continue to push through those barriers anyway. Overall, this chapter made me respect women in the military much more . They’re not just fighting for their country. They’re also fighting for respect, equality, recognition, and in the system that wasn’t built for them.

variety of toys will also give kids the option to explore things hopefully outside of those set expectations and gender based things 

Gender Representation:

• 38 women were depicted

• 12 men were depicted

Throughout most of the photos that I analyzed, women are overwhelmingly more depicted than males, which reinforces that idea that beauty is more tied to femininity instead of masculinity. Men seem to appear less frequently and are often styled in celebrity context, suggesting that male beauty is less emphasized or marketed in the same way

Racial/Ethnic Representation (based on visuals):

• 32 individuals appeared to be White

• 8 individuals appeared to be Black

• 4 individuals appeared to be Latino

• 4 individuals appeared to be East Asian

• 1 individual appeared to be South Asian

• 1 individual had an ambiguous or mixed appearance

I noticed that in a lot of the images, it seems that white people dominated the images more frequently, especially in cover features and solo shots. While black and east Asian people are present they’re more framed through an artistic or cultural, kind of view rather than the typical mainstream beauty. South Asian and Latino representation on the other hand is very minimal, which may reflect lack of representation.

Skin Tone Representation:

• 35 individuals had light skin tones

• 10 individuals had medium skin tones

• 5 individuals had dark skin tones

light skin tones are most frequently associated with the pictures that are taken to represent luxury, elegance, etc. While darker skin tones appear in more of an activist context, which can unintentionally suggest that they are exceptions to beauty norms rather than central to them.

Body Type Representation:

• 3 individuals had visible body fat

• 47 individuals did not have visible body fat

This analysis of these images shocked me the most. Only 3 out of 50 images featured models with visible body fat, and they’re also implied as images of body positivity rather than general beauty. This suggests that thinness remains dominant when it comes to beauty magazines, while fat bodies are still treated as educational or symbolic, rather than simply beautiful.

• Families change with society: Economic shifts, wars, and social movements have all shaped how families look and function.

• Working-class families often rely on teamwork: Instead of one breadwinner, everyone pitches in, kids, extended relatives, and both parents.

• Race and class matter: Black, Latino, and immigrant families often face different pressures and build support systems that don’t match the “mainstream” model.

• Gender roles are shifting: More women work outside the home, and dads are getting more involved in parenting, but expectations still aren’t equal.

• There’s no one “right” way to be a family: Single parents, same-sex couples, blended families, and chosen families all count. What matters is support, love, and survival.

The meme “delulu is the solulu” basically means being delusional is the solution. People use it jokingly to hype themselves up, like pretending their crush likes them back. From a sociological perspective, this shows how this generation uses humor to deal with insecurity and social pressure. Instead of admitting we’re nervous about relationships or the future, we joke about being “delulu.” It connects to coping mechanisms and how groups use humor to make stressful things feel normal in a way