The (Not So) Big Book of

Sociology

Introduction to Sociology Students

2016
 Table of Contents
Chapter 1 Sociology & The Social Construction of Reality 1
Sociology 1
The Social Construction of Reality 1
Society 4
Material Culture 5
Cognitive Culture 6
Normative Culture 8
Socialization, Social Control & Breaking Folkways 10
Max Weber: Power & Authority 14
Conclusion 18
Chapter 2 Social Stratification 19
Class 20
Gender 31
Race 41
Conclusion 51
Chapter 3 The Sociological Imagination 52
The Sociological Imagination 52
Society 56
History 57
Biography 58
Troubles & Issues 64
Putting It All Together 65
Conclusion 67
References 69

i
Authors:
Loushana Amisial, Jackie Andrasko, Jahnai Bass, Taylor Beauvais, Ti’anna Bell, Drew Benson,
Tybria Blackwell, Kyle Bogardus, Thomas Bong, Heather Brown, Matt Cannella, Kara Church,
Beth Church-Peters, Brandon Copes, Annie Cortright, Jesse Covert, Nick Cowen, Darliss Cruz,
Mirbeth De Los Santos, James Demshick, Skylar Diamond, Zach Dufel, Brittney Dunn, Jimmy
Durkee, Vanessa Eastman, Ryan Ellis, Rachel Evans, Kelly Goulding, Kidane Haile, Ryan
Hammond, Tahlia Hanna-Martinez, Shyanne Hartman, Melinda Heath, Carol Hernandez, Atzin
Hernandez-Villas, Bethany Hinman, Levi Holl, Josh Holleran, Teigan Hoover, Emily Horton,
Cheyenne Jackson, Jillian Janasiewicz, Devin Jewell, Oddisey Jones, Tashia Jones, Latisha
Joseph, Caitlyn Juliano, Autumn Kenyon, Nikole Kinner, Shelby Klemann, Becky Knolls,
Golder Kportufe, Matt Lagrelius, Krissy Lajoie, Deanna Levitskiy, Christian Lincoln, Jaquela
Lockwood, Tahaan Lucas, Ariadenis Luna, Jon Margiotta, Quintin McKinney, Jeff Meister,
Taylor Mellina, Kelsey Merritt, Corey Morgan, Diana Mosquea, Amanda Nadge, Tamara Nunez,
Oreofe Omoaolu, Caterina Oppong, Jennifer Osipov, Kayla Parchment, Rebby Parker, Jamie
Pastorello, Emily Perkins, Destin Preston, Liza Reif, Jordan Robinson, Haley Sammis, Sam
Schmidt, Temerald Singleton, Dan Stark-Quick, Breanna Stewart, Vanessa Stoian, Mike Strauss,
Jarrett Sullivan, Rose Tejada, Jennifer Tello, Tyrone Thigpen, Brian Thornton, Sabina Triunfel,
Brady Van Auken, Leo Vazenios, Morgan Weidman, Luke Wood, Keenan Worth, and Giulio
Zampogna

ii
 Chapter 1:
Sociology & The Social Construction
of Reality

Sociology is the study of society and individuals. It is the study of how externalities shape

a person’s life. Or, to be wordier, “it is the systematic study of the relationship between the

individuals and society and of the consequences of difference.” (Witt 2007, 3) This means that in

order to really understand individuals, we should also work to understand the society around them.

Psychology, in contrast, is the study of the human mind and why it makes us act the way we act.

Psychologists examine the internal reasons for behavior. Sociology, on the other hand, is the study

of human society and how it affects individual and group behavior. Sociologists examine the

external reasons for behavior. In order to study sociology, a person must develop a skill called the

sociological imagination.

The Social Construction of Reality

In this section we will take a look at how the things that people create, whether it be a

physical object or a new meaning to a word, affects the way society functions and how people live

their lives. The Social Construction of Reality (SCR) involves “the construction of objects,

knowledge, and rules for behavior that we come to share collectively” (Witt 2007, 94). The Social

Construction of Reality is the making of objects, knowledge and rules. It affects all of us by

influencing our behaviors and thoughts. Society is the outcome of the Social Construction of

Reality, which is what shapes, defines, and makes our society what it is today.

1
 The social construction of reality consists of the perceptions and behaviors of individuals

as shaped by society and language. It is an overarching context for social interaction between

individuals, and is guided by established patterns of thoughts and actions within a society. This

patterned context is constantly being restructured by means of the cyclical, reciprocating impact

between individuals and society, and presents itself as the process of socialization—the structural

shaping of how one acts and thinks in order to function within a society or group. “Socialization

is essential for our development as human beings. From our interaction with others, we learn how

to think, reason, and feel. The net result is the shaping of our behavior—including our thinking

and emotions—according to cultural standards. This is what sociologists mean when they refer to

‘society within us’” (Henslin, 2011, p. 69). In other words, socialization creates in an individual

a social conscience and conscious—that is, society impacts and influences individuals into

collective mindsets, and those individuals then reinvent society through the ways they act and

think. One can break down the Social Construction of Reality into three simple parts:

1. We create something (by acting/ thinking)

2. That something we create becomes a THING (and is no longer controlled by its creator)

3. The THING impacts us

An example of this is what the Microsoft Corporation has done. Bill Gates created a word

processor, Microsoft Office, which is the number one word processor in the world, and it has

become a part of everyday society. People all over the world use this program for a variety of

projects and tasks. 1) When Bill Gates enjoyed messing around with computers by creating

programs, which is where Gates began creating Microsoft Word. 2) When Microsoft Word was

published, it became a program used by millions of people. 3) Microsoft Word is now impacting

the lives of individuals all around the world. Microsoft Word has impacted Jeff’s life. Jeff would

2
not be able to write this chapter without Microsoft Word, which means that you, the reader, would

have a difficult time learning about the Social Construction of Reality. Bill Gate’s creation of

Microsoft Word started as something he created, by thinking of how it would look, how it would

work, and how it could be better than already existing word processors. Then when Gates finally

completed his program, it became a thing that people used all over the world. Microsoft Word

then impacted people all around the world, millions of people rely on his program for school and

work

In sports, for example, players often refer to each other by their last names. However, in

the U.S., individuals are typically referred to by either their first name or an honorific followed by

their last name. Sports players socialized into this aspect of sports culture may carry that norm

with them into the greater U.S. society. Whether or not calling people by their last names becomes

a norm will depend on acceptance by the population majority. Zach plays sports and often calls

people by their last names. He deviates from proper naming, and it has become a norm for him—

that is, socialization failed to make him adherent to this norm. Will the populace adopt this new

variation of the norm in question, or will social control suppress its emergence? If it has a great

enough influence, it will succeed and alter the SCR—how individuals act, think, and interact with

each other.

Through social construction of reality, we have created everything that makes up our

society.

3
Society

Over time, people with similar ideas, institutions, and practices come together and form a

society. Within society, there are three parts that make it up: structure, culture, and interaction.

Interaction is the common everyday relationships we create with people and "exchange

our cultural resources within our structural positions," (Witt 2007, 23). From the moment we were

born, we have been interacting with other people. Both verbal and psychical actions have a part in

day-to-day interaction with other people.

Structures are "the patterns that provide the environment within which we act" (Witt 2007,

22). Structure is like the skeletal system of society. This includes the constraints, laws, and

opportunities available. Sociologist James Henslin defines social structure as “the framework that

surrounds us, consisting of the relationship of people and groups to one another, which give

direction to and set limits on behavior” (Henslin, 2011, p. 86). By this definition, social structure

is the overarching network of relationships between individuals within and between social

institutions and as influenced by culture, statuses and roles, social groups, and social stratification.

Note that all these components of social structure are interrelated and inseparable. For example,

statuses and roles may be characteristic of a particular culture and vice versa. Principally, however,

social structure is the lattice of interactions and relationships that create and sustain a society. The

SCR is a product of the conscious reflection by individuals on how social structure affects our

perceptions of reality; however, the SCR exists whether or not we are aware of such effects—

whether or not we think using the sociological imagination. Culture—the only SCR and social

structure component that will be discussed further here—consists of everything humans in a

particular society create and how those creations influence socialization. Culture can be divided

into three interactive parts: material, cognitive, and normative.

4
Material Culture

Material culture consists of the physical objects created by individuals in a society or

group. For simplicity, this definition does not include innovative methods for using natural objects.

For example, sticks and rocks were likely used as tools in primitive cultures. Although these were

physical objects having great utility and importance in primitive societies, they were not invented.

When one of those sticks or rocks was intentionally sharpened, however, then they became

components of material culture. Previously, the innovative use of natural objects may be instead

classified as a component of cognitive culture because their uses were only guided by ideas rather

than intentional modifications. Regardless, invented physical objects are produced through a cycle

of innovation influenced by context, in particular the values and beliefs of a society or group. For

example, airplanes were invented for the purpose of long-distance—and eventually

intercontinental—travel. If traveling such long distances was not believed to be important and

valued by society, individuals would have had little or no incentive to invent the airplane.

Likewise, if air travel did not become a highly preferred method of long-distance transportation,

airplane technology would not have been so thoroughly enhanced and airplanes equipped with

various auxiliary facilities. Cell phones and condoms are additional examples of material culture.

Cell phones have globally changed how individuals communicate with one another. Most

communication before cell phones was either talking to people face to face or by telephone. But

cell phones also have the capability for text messaging. Text messaging is what most people do on

their regular or smart phones these days. Most communication is through texting now because

people believe it is quicker and easier to do rather than calling or talking face to face with someone.

Older generations think this is ridiculous because they grew up in a world where you either had to

talk to someone face to face or on the telephone. One exemplary experience that Zach had with

5
cell phones was when he texted someone that was in the same room as him. Zach did this because

he wanted to tell that person something that no one else could know. However, his friend next to

him saw the text and remarked, “Really, you guys are in the same damn classroom; you can’t just

go tell him?” Zach replied, “No, I don’t want anyone else to know.” Zach usually uses texting to

easily communicate secrets or other important information. Texting is now commonplace in

today’s world, and it may be advanced and continue to influence the communication between

individuals for generations to come.

Another example of material culture is in Brandon’s life. Brandon lives in upstate New

York where there is a lot of snow. He was given the chore of shoveling off the driveway so that

everyone could get off to school and work in the morning. No matter how much hot chocolate he

drank, he could never stay warm enough. His tears would freeze on his face in the bitter winds.

Finally, after he got frostbite on the tip of his nose, his parents decided to buy him a snow blower.

The material context of the situation made it a no brainer for his parents. Now Brandon does not

mind clearing the snow from his drive as he can do it in a fraction of the time it used to take, and

he’s never had frostbite again.

Material objects alter how we interact with the environment and socialize, and thus

restructure the SCR.

Cognitive Culture

Cognitive culture consists of the collective thoughts, ideas, beliefs, and processes or ways

of thinking shared by individuals in a society. Language is the foundation of cognitive culture (and

perhaps the SCR itself) because it enables the sharing of past, present, and future perspectives of

reality, perspectives that can be carried through generations (Henslin, 2011, p. 42). Language is a

6
type of spoken or unspoken communication that has several different forms, such as vocal,

physical, and pictorial. Language is the way that we define and give meaning to everything around

us and beyond. It makes society possible because it allows us to assign words or symbols to

everything around us, making it possible to communicate with one another. Language is not just

the words we speak; it is the way we use our body language, pictures, signs, and many other forms

that contribute to how we speak.

For example, as children, we are born without any understanding of the things around us.

Babies cannot speak and are completely unaware of the names of objects that surround them. They

are also unaware of the meanings of these objects. Parents teach their babies their first words

through repetition. The baby will eventually to form the word themselves, but the meaning will

not yet be understood. As the baby grows and with the help of their parents the meaning of the

words will begin to be understood.

Another example of cognitive culture would be Kristie's experiment of walking up to

complete strangers and saying "I Love You". The phrase "I Love You" means a lot. This phrase

has an attached emotion to it, a promise, and a direct implication that the user feels or has Love

for the recipient. When Kristie said this to complete strangers she was using the phrase out of the

context in which it was meant. It's no wonder she got the reactions of "Go away" or to have people

just stare at her. Within our society the cognitive culture of that phrase is reserved for the people

in our life that we have those such feelings for.

We also interpret a large amount of communication without the use of any spoken words.

Just by looking at someone's face, you are able to read their emotions at the time. If someone's

eyes are puffy, red, and watery, we may assume that they are upset and have been crying. It is also

possible to read people's actions and interpret what they are thinking. When someone is not

7
interesting in talking to you, they may avoid eye contact, cross their legs are from you or their

arms. There are countless numbers of ways to predict how someone might be feeling without using

any words.

Body language can also help us read whether someone likes us or not. We pick this up by

whether someone blushes, how they smile, move their body, or the lack there of those items. Like

when Khadijah was hanging with a group of friends. She knew that her best friend had a major

crush on a male friend of hers. Her girlfriend would make a point to laugh at his jokes, smile in

his direction, and try to get close. While Khadijah's friend was doing this, she noticed that her

male friend was backing away from the flirty advances. She picks up from her male friends body

language that he just is not into the girl. In other words, the girl is not going to make it past the

friend zone.

Our thoughts, ideas, and beliefs significantly influence how we view reality, and contribute

to the SCR.

Normative Culture

Normative culture consists of the rules, or norms, for interaction between and followed

by individuals in a society in order to create and maintain structure in their lives. Norms are rules

individuals follow in order to be socially accepted within their society. Normative culture helps to

shape our lives and make socializing and interactions with other people possible. Social norms

become an ingrained part of a society that become second nature, meaning that people usually

obey them without even thinking about it. These rules and norms are ones that are mutually

accepted and followed by individuals so that we can interact with others and society on a day-to

day basis. Norms can be divided into two groups: mores and folkways.

8
 Mores are written laws or doctrines that are “strictly enforced because they are thought

essential to core values or the well-being of the group” (Henslin, 2011, p. G4). In this way, mores

are norms that reflect the collective conscience of mechanical societies (as described by Durkheim)

because the values underlying the norms are shared or collective. When someone breaks a more,

they will most likely have broken a law, but it is important to note that laws and mores are not

mutually exclusive (meaning that in certain situations there could be a more that is not against the

law). When someone breaks a more they are not only punished by the justice system, they are also

looked upon with scorn from most, if not all members of society.

An example of breaking a more would be molesting a child. There are strict laws that have

been made that try to prevent this horrific crime from happening. When someone chooses to

commit such a crime, they need to know what they are getting themselves into. The government

is going to take strong action, and society is going to see the perpetrator as lowly scum. If someone

is convicted of being a child molester, they are sent off to prison for a very long time. When other

prison inmates hear the crime that this individual committed, they often treat the molester very

poorly. Many times when someone is convicted of child molesting they are put into solitary

confinement for their protection from other inmates. Even other criminals find molesting an

innocent child horrific and socially unacceptable. Not only did the molester break a more norm,

which resulted in legal punishment, but the molester must also deal with societal punishment

because of the magnitude of the crime.

Folkways are, unlike mores, unwritten day-to-day norms that are not rigorously enforced

by the group or essential to the group’s well-being and social stability. Folkways keep society in

order by keeping things that people expect out of one another in order. A folkway is sort of an

unspoken rule that society accepts as a whole. When a folkway norm is broken, the reaction to it

9
is much less than that of a more. Some examples of folkways are holding the door for someone,

walking down the right side of the hallway to keep traffic flowing smoothly, using your phone in

the appropriate places, etc. Breaking a norm can affect society in different ways for different

people depending on how they react. For example, if you walk through a door and do not hold it

open for the person behind you, they could get mad, not care, or maybe even ask you what your

problem is. Folkways literally apply to EVERYTHING that we do, ALL day long. From how you

eat, to the amount of volume allowed in conversation, to the way we walk, everything!

Socialization, Social Control and Breaking Folkways

Socialization is the process of learning how to become a functional, structured, and

interactive member of society. Socialization starts at a very young age, when parents begin to teach

their children proper manners and socially acceptable behavior. This process continues as one

enters into grade school, where socially acceptable behavior is constantly reinforced, such as

raising one’s hand when trying to speak during class as to not interrupt the teacher and provide

order in the classroom. We learn norms through the process of socialization.

Of course, every now and then, someone breaks these norms and those around them will

somehow correct their behavior; this concept is known as social control. Social control is when

someone or individuals, try to correct the "deviant behavior" of the "norm breaker" to maintain

good and stable social structure. These "corrections" so to speak could be anything from something

as subtle as a stare to even verbal warning or indication that you are engaging in deviant behavior.

So for instance if you were to stand too close to the person in front of you in a line and they turn

around and stare at you for a second; that would be practice of social control. If you were to go

head and skip everyone on that same line, virtually everyone would stare at you with somewhat of

10
a "death glare;" or someone might even go ahead and say something to you about it. That awkward

feeling you feel while your behavior is being corrected is how you know that social control is

working. A far more sever act of social control would be the involvement of authority figures such

as a policemen; but such interventions only happen when extreme cases of norm breaking have

occurred, such as committing a crime(obviously). An example of social control is when Liza

called the cops on her ex-boyfriend. It is a social norm that men do not hit girls and vice versa.

When Liza was hit by her ex, he was breaking a social norm in an extreme case. This then involved

the presence of a police officer to keep social control of the situation.

Alisha

Proper eating etiquette in the U.S., especially with regard to the use of eating utensils, is

considered a component of socialization. Individuals who neglect table manners or demonstrate

an inability to use common eating utensils for their intended purposes may be perceived as

primitive and unsocialized. After all, in individualistic societies like the U.S., self-care skills (such

as feeding oneself using the proper utensils) are supported and encouraged in the early childhood

years to hasten independence. Alisha received a characteristic response by her coworkers when

she decided to break this folkway—to appear as though she had never learned the proper uses of

eating utensils. While at work, Alisha grabbed a bowl of soup and proceeded to eat it with a fork.

The head chef began laughing and remarked critically, “What the fuck are you doing?” Alisha

responded, saying that she was simply “eating soup.” The head chef called her a “dumbass” and

began joking with the other employees about Alisha’s behavior; this was an exemplary

demonstration of social control: using verbal aggression and convening others to join the cause in

correcting the deviant behavior of another. Of course, Alisha’s actions would not have been

11
perceived as so unusual and shocking if the U.S. society did not routinely use forks and spoons

while eating. That is, through socialization we are accustomed to using and seeing others use eating

utensils and in a certain way. Using a fork to eat liquid-only soup? You must be stupid; unless, of

course, you were never socialized into using eating utensils properly or at all. In the end, Alisha’s

boss approached and handed her a spoon, chuckling and suggesting, “Here. This might work

better.” And, thus, she was resocialized into proper eating etiquette.

Geoff

When he was little, Geoff was taught how to hold doors open for people coming through

behind him. Geoff did this for years until he had an assignment to break a social norm. The

anxious feelings Geoff felt prior to violating a social norm, are an example of proper socialization.

He violated a social norm by not opening the door for an individual close behind him. He made a

conscious decision not to open the door, as he wanted to see what kind of a reaction he would get.

He was very nervous prior to violating the norm, as he likes to follow the grain and fit in with

acceptable social behaviors. The negative reactions he received were an indication that people

thought that Geoff was not socialized to the standards set by our society.

Zach

In the U.S., it is considered cordial and respectful to greet or refer to someone by their first

name or an honorific followed by their last name (e.g. Mr. E). Why such greetings are perceived

as conveying respect may be because we are accustomed—through socialization—to greet others

in this way. Zach played sports all his life, and he adopted a common folkway shared by members

of the sports community: calling people by their last name without any honorific (e.g. E).

12
Generally, Zach has found that people usually do not mind being called by their bare last name.

For the first occurrence, an individual might respond with slight confusion and perhaps ask why

he called them by their last name. But once Zach explains that it is just what he does, typically the

people simply shrug it off. However, Zach once had an extreme encounter when breaking this

folkway in the society outside the world of sports. When Zach called one of his friend’s mothers

by their last name, she responded with hostility. She pulled Zach aside and reprimanded him,

telling him that he was never to call her by her last name every again. Unbeknownst to Zach, his

friend’s mother had family problems over the years and did not want to be known by her last name.

This direct confrontation is an example of social control: Zach was scolded and straightforwardly

told that his behavior was not acceptable.

Hunting

Another example that relates to mores, folkways, socialization and social control is

hunting. If you hunt, you know that there are a lot of rules or mores. Before hunting season starts

you are required to buy your hunting license and all your tags for what animal you are hunting.

When in the woods you must have a back tag, which is a license you must pin to the back of

whatever you are wearing. If you shoot a deer, you must tag the animal before you drag it or put

in a vehicle. People who do not tag their kill are breaking mores and are faced with a large fine

when caught. People who hunt and play by the rules do not like the people who do not. The

consequences of not tagging a deer can result in losing your hunting license and losing your kill.

People, during hunting season do not always play by the rules.

The rules for hunting are that you must be ten yards off the road and on your own property

to shoot a deer. You also must be 100 yards away from any structure. This can result in losing your

13
actual license and you may be criminally charged if caught. A big problem we have as hunters

during hunting season is road hunters who kill deer from their vehicle on our land. Just like there

are folkways in our society and everyday things, there are also folkways in hunting. A

commonsense rule or (folkway) is that you do not hunt on someone else’s land without permission,

especially if you are in your vehicle. Road hunting is also a more, considering it is illegal.

After shooting a deer, you must “gut” the deer to make it easier to drag and so it does not

spoil. To do so you must make a cut from the deer rectum to the sternum. Then you reach inside

the deer and take the guts out. This includes the intestines, liver, heart, lungs, and stomach. This

to some may be disturbing and disgusting to some, but for others who grew up doing this, it’s a

good day’s hunting. Socialization is important to hunting because someone who grows up in a

hunting family learns from the individual in their family that has hunting experience. Another way

to socialize a hunter is that you must complete an eight-hour safety course. In this course, you

learn everything from gun safety to folkways about private lands. They teach you not to go on

other people’s hunting land because it is illegal and is just common courtesy. For gun safety, they

teach you how to hold your weapon as you are walking, and how to load and unload your specific

weapon. On a weapon, there are certain safety issues, such as a fire pin. This is a button on your

weapon you must push or slide in order to fire the weapon. It is critical to have your weapon on

safety at all hours unless your seconds away from firing.

Max Weber: Power & Authority

Accordion to Witt, Max Weber thinks that “how we think shapes what we do” (Witt, 80)

and that “our thoughts and beliefs also drive our actions, including how we produce and whether

to or not we obey authority” (Witt, 81). Power is the ability to make somebody do what you want,

14
even if they do not want to. One type of power is coercion, or a forceful power. A good example

of the use of coercive power is when the French emperor known as Napoleon Bonaparte conquered

many countries throughout Europe. He did this with the force of his great French military.

Although this is military power, Napoleon was determined to conquer the world, and saw fit to

enforce violence and war on the other nations. This kind of power can also be seen in the

relationships between siblings:

Coercion is not based on “rules,” but on demands that must be followed or there will be

extreme consequences.

Legitimate power is considered to be authority because it is much more widely accepted

when compared to coercion. There are accepted reasons for granting authority. There are three

forms of legitimate power – traditional authority, charismatic authority, and rational legal

authority:

15
 Traditional authority is accepted because it is the way things have always been done. As

Witt (84) says, “The past is the justification of the present.” For Weber, traditional authority is

irrational because the reasons for following it don’t necessarily make sense to everyone and over

time it gets questioned. Heather experienced this type of irrational traditional authority during a

Chemistry course in college. Heather had a professor in Chemistry that would half teach a lesson

and then give Heather and her classmates a 15 question quiz about the material. Every time

Heather's instructor did this, most of the class failed the quiz because they hadn’t fully learned the

lesson or Heather’s professor hadn’t explained it enough. If anyone ever asked why Heather's

professor didn’t wait longer for the quiz or mentioned that the class didn’t understand the lesson

yet, Heather's professor would always reply, “This is the way I teach and that’s how I run this

class.” This left about 25 angry students every single week, all semester long. Heather's class all

16
collectively felt that their professors teaching methods weren’t in the best educational interests of

the students and that their professor's methods of teaching and reasoning were irrational. Even

though traditionally students are required to do what their professors ask of them, this is an

example of how sometimes that traditional authority does not work.

Charismatic authority is where the authority exists because of someone’s charisma or

perceived specialness. In other words, charismatic authority is about a specific individual and his

or her characteristics. One example of charismatic authority of a particular leader is Barack Obama.

When he was running for president, his charismatic qualities inspired people to believe in him and

convince other people to view him as a powerful leader, making people wanting to follow him.

This authority is also irrational because it doesn’t work all the time or with every person. People

also might not agree that someone is special or charismatic and so might not follow that person.

Rational-legal authority is authority based on rules, procedures and principles that are

established to accomplish goals in the most efficient manner possible. Rational-legal authority is

a legal system that was built by Rationalized thought, or in a word, Rationalization. This type of

authority is the most widely accepted, and thoroughly calculated type of authority. Many people

in our modern capitalist society who have this authority are elected, and follow the same set of

rules that the previous holder of their position followed. For example, every president has to honor

the U.S Constitution, and go through Congress for certain issues. They cannot simply sent troops

to war on a whim or start executing civilians for heresy; they have to follow the laws that are

cemented into their positions. When people are given an authority position, they have to follow

the rules in order to maintain that position and run their skills in an efficient manner. For a variety

of reasons, in our society we tend to accept rational-legal authority as legitimate and usually follow

it without questioning it. This is the type of life we live with our government and laws. We as

17
citizens must obey the rules or else suffer the consequences. When Stephanie was sixteen, she

followed the driver’s license rules and got her license a week after she got her permit. Her dad

thought it would be easier for her if she got her license because she always needed a ride to

cheerleading, dance class, or tennis. When she got her license, she was sixteen, and there was a

rule that said that she couldn’t drive after 9:00pm. She broke the rule, however, and got pulled

over twice breaking it. The police officers used their rational-legal authority to give her tickets as

a consequence of her violating the rule. She accepted the tickets because she knew that she had

violated the rules, and she saw the rules and their consequences as legitimate.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the social construction of reality suggests that reality is not just a reflection

of our thought process or even a reflection of the world as an individual sees it. It emerges from

the interaction between many people. An individual's thoughts can change how society functions

with ideas and that in turn causes society to impact how we live our everyday lives. Through all

the "Things" that we create, common folkways and norms evolve; these then help to regulate our

interactions within a society. These interactions can cause changes due to new ideas (things) and

this affects society's structure and culture. It is an ever-changing circular system. As humans, we

have to understand how our society works and what out place in it is. , if we can understand this

basic principle then we can begin to innovate on how society could be different and what we could

do to change our own lives and the state of society as a whole. With new innovations, we can

educate others how to act and think in the world we live in (hopefully in a positive way).

18
 Chapter 2:
Social Stratification
Throughout every society, there are examples of people being categorized into superficial

subgroups of the population. Once any larger, unified group becomes separated, there is almost

always a hierarchy, or ranking that is established. Those who are socially ranked as the highest

have better access to resources and more opportunities than those lower on the ladder. This

hierarchy-establishing categorizing is termed Social Stratification. It is important to note that

social stratification is socially constructed (it does not exist; instead, it is made up by members of

a society). Not only does social stratification affect a group’s ability to acquire material goods, but

the ranking and classification of individuals also provides ample stereotypes (usually about those

lower on the hierarchy) and behavior patterns that groups are supposed to follow for fear of

consequences. The process of levels and hierarchies gradually became adopted by society, and the

adoption of such constructs gave rise to what is referred to as Institutionalized Stratification,

which simply means stratification is now established as practice and custom in the society”.

Institutionalized stratification is, ultimately, when social stratification is accepted by the whole of

society. While there are many examples of institutionalized stratification, the three most well-

known and observable illustrations of this concept are gender, class, and race.

Privilege is the reception of benefits that are unearned and given only because of one’s

higher standing in the social stratification hierarchy. One often associates the term “privilege”

with the children of millionaires and billionaires because they inherit familial wealth (the benefit,

in this case) through no work or exertion of their own. Another, more elusive, idea of privilege is

the attitude that certain right-wing politicians display toward immigrants and the topic of

19
immigration as a whole. The basic idea is that this is our country, which must be preserved by very

strict immigration policies. Many United States citizens, however, have “earned” their citizenship

through no work of their own. Instead, they were simply born into the country and labeled

“citizens” immediately. There was nothing that made them deserving of being a citizen; they just

had the good fortune of being born in the United States to people who were already “labeled”

citizens. In this way, privilege is often entirely attributable to luck on the part of its beneficiary.

Social stratification is based almost entirely on privilege because membership in the higher strata

of society is often based on physical features or other, unimportant, yet difficult-to-change

features. Those in the upper class of the hierarchy rarely earn their elevated status. It is simply

granted to them due to some biological or inherited trait, which is the very essence of privilege.

Life chances are basically opportunities that, if used right, will help one better his or herself

in life. An individual may have a life chance based on who they were born to, where they live,

how wealthy they are, or any number of other factors. Therefore, a life chance is something that is

out of one’s control. Life chances and privilege are interconnected because one’s place on the

societal ladder will, naturally, affect the opportunities that are available to him.

Class

When conversing about class, one must acknowledge that there are two forms of it:

economic and social class. Economic class refers to the amount of money and material goods one

has. Social Class, on the other hand, rests in the goods that provide hints at one’s financial

situation. While economic class is based on something concrete (money), social class is completely

illusory.

20
 In grade school is when most adolescence start to notice social class and how it was

divided. During gym class, lunch, study hall, and recess one can see the difference between groups

of friends. One automatically divided themselves into groups based on our class. This hierarchy is

seen as high class, middle class, or low class. The group of high-class kids were the ones wearing

expensive clothes like Ralph Lauren, their parents dropped them off in a BMW, and they always

brought their lunch. Middle class kids were okay with their Aeropostale t-shirts and Nike sneakers,

while riding the school bus and buying lunch at school. One considers the low class students to be

the ones with Walmart sneakers, smelly clothes, and they received free lunch because they didn’t

have any money, so we thought. As children, many start putting labels on classes without even

knowing it because that’s how many were taught to act and think in society which impacts and

influences the next generation. The kids who were thought to be low class or poor might have

actually had very wealthy parents, a nice house, or that BMW, but because social class is based on

what society thinks and not physical wealth one doesn’t know about their actual class.

There is a certain recklessness that is associated with social class. Because social class is

based on mere appearances, one can attempt to increase his or her ranking on the class ladder by

living above his or her means. For example, one might purchase an expensive new car, while at

the same time struggling to pay rent on a studio apartment, to move up on the ladder of social

class. Moving into a wealthy neighborhood will increase one’s social class, even if buying

groceries is impossible. While it is very difficult to move up in economic class, a high social class

can support the illusion that one is faring better economically than he or she actually is. Social

class, fundamentally, is meant to cover up one’s lack of finances and material goods and, by natural

progression, allow one to interact with those in better economic standing than oneself (many times,

economic class is also a type of social circle, with those at the top rarely interacting with those

21
lower than them). Unfortunately, even if someone is able to converse and socialize with those

higher in economic standing than him, it does not guarantee an increase in economic class. This is

because of the unspoken assumption that those who appear higher in economic class are financially

secure enough to support themselves without the help of others.

Economic class is, oftentimes, the first thing one thinks of in relation to the word “class.”

Unlike social class, economic class is based on something measurable and concrete: financial and

material wealth, as well as, income. Economic Stratification occurs when people are ranked and

categorized into separate sections by the amount of money they make, the material possessions

(and the projected financial value of such items) they own, and the amount of money they have

saved. Those with more money and high-worth possessions will be placed into the higher

categories, which allows them access to goods and resources they otherwise would not have. Once

the economic stratification is integrated into society and influences the way that the population

acts, thinks, and sees the world, institutionalized class has been established. The very idea of

economic class has been formed by the societal embedding of social stratification and the resulting

institutionalized class.

Richard Fry and Rakesh Kochhar, writing for the Pew Research Center, state:

A new Pew Research Center analysis of wealth finds the gap

between America’s upper-income and middle-income families has
reached its highest level on record. In 2013, the median wealth of
the nation’s upper-income families ($639,400) was nearly seven
times the median wealth of middle-income families ($96,500), the
widest wealth gap seen in 30 years when the Federal Reserve began
collecting these data.

In addition, the data shows that 46% of American families fall within the middle class, 33% are

lower class, and 21% are fortunate enough to be members of the upper class (Fry and Kochhar).

Fry and Kochhar chart their findings:

22
Source: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/12/17/wealth-gap-upper-middle-income/

Fry and Kochhar point to the doubling of the upper income statistics as compare to the

relative stagnation of the middle and lower income class within the thirty year period. Of course,

each class had a significant growth in income in the early to mid-2000s, but the middle and lower

classes regressed back to where they initially started two years ago (Fry and Kochhar)

According to a newer data analysis by the Pew Research Center, the American middle class

appears as though it is gradually being swallowed by the upper class (The American Middle

Class). This assumption came from the careful study of data over a forty-four year period (1970-

2014). The researchers found that the United States population in 1971 was composed of 60.79%

middle class; whereas, the 2015 middle-income class is only 49.897% of the overall population

(The American Middle Class). Coupling this steep drop off with the aggregate income percentages

from 1970 to 2014 tells a disturbing narrative. The middle-income class earned 62% of the

aggregate income in 1970 with the upper class pulling in 29% and the lower class accounting for

just 10% of the aggregate income (The American Middle Class). In 2014, however, the upper class

23
made 49% of aggregate income with the middle-income class receding to 43% and the lower class

falling a percentage point to 9% of aggregate income (The American Middle Class). What these

numbers indicate is that an economic shift is occurring, which threatens to further alienate the

lower and middle-income classes from valuable resources and necessary financial benefits. With

this information in mind, the wider-class distribution can be analyzed:

Source:http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/

While there has been some growth in the upper and upper-middle classes, it appears that

there is a significant percentage of middle-income households have fallen into the lower class (The

American Middle Class). Instead of an economic leveling out of income as one might expect,

America is being divided into polarities: the extremely wealthy and the extremely poor. Using the
24
previous statistics to further shed light on this issue, the upper 22% of Americans are making 49%

of the country’s aggregated income, while the bottom 29% collect only 9% of such income (The

American Middle Class). The middle 50% collects 43% of the aggregated income (The American

Middle Class).

There is a sense of increasing stratification within the American economy. One could argue

that the very tenets of capitalism support a competitive, stratified economic system. This is not to

condemn capitalism, but a sense of financial inequality is inherent in the capitalist philosophy,

which says “if you want it, then go and get it.” But, with the upper class taking such an astonishing

amount of the country’s income, can anyone truly adhere to this ideology? The common response

to the lower class is that they are unambitious, unmotivated, and lazy; therefore, they are poor and

deserve to stay that way. The basic principles of stratification, however, show that those lower in

class often do not have access to the same basic resources that the people who are members of the

upper class do. For example, those who are part of the lower class will have a significantly harder

chance at getting a college education (not only do they have financial troubles, but the educational

institutions in low-income areas have a tendency to be lackluster, making it harder for one to be

intellectually prepared for college). The idea that anyone can, with careful spending and saving,

increase his or her economic standing is not a sound concept. When one lives paycheck-to-

paycheck, it can be difficult to tuck money away for some future endeavor. Capitalism would say

that if one really wanted to achieve something, they would risk everything they had to achieve it,

but simultaneously, capitalism crushes those who make poor financial choices. The inconsistency

and confusing rhetoric of capitalism often causes people to remain in place within the lower class

and hope that somehow, everything will get better as time progresses (history shows it usually

doesn’t). Of course, it is unfair to villainize capitalism on the grounds of social stratification (even

25
dictatorships have a class system), but the capitalist mindset involves a type of magical, wishful

thinking that “you can do anything you want to do if you put your mind to it,” which is an idea

best left to movies and fairy tales. The reality is that some people simply get stuck in the lower

class situations and have no way out of it, short of starving themselves and living on the street.

The notion that the lower class is poor and has little access to resources because of its own work

habits and lifestyle choices has infected many individuals in American society, which helps to

further reinforce the already prevalent institutionalized class.

Institutionalized class and economic stratification don’t just affect the attitudes of people;

they also can affect the actions of individuals and societal establishments. For instance, when

Brian walks into the cafeteria at TC3 and sees the military recruitment officers, he wonders what

the chances are that the military also attempts to recruit individuals at Harvard (a school associated

with the upper class). This does not seem very likely, as students at Harvard are often from wealthy

families (no stress about how to pay for college) or already in full pursuit of their dreams (an

interruption for military service seems unlikely). Because Harvard and community colleges are

both associated with economic classes, there is a certain stereotype of student at each one. The

main reason for a college student to interrupt his or her studies for military service is the financial

uncertainty that lies ahead, which is partially caused by the massive accumulation of student debt.

Harvard students, while taking on more debt than a student at a community college, are often more

equipped to handle the costs of college because of familial ties and the lucrative job offers that

come with being a graduate of Harvard. For a community college student, however, the financial

future is far less certain. Oftentimes, members of a community college student body are middle

and lower class students, who do not have the certainty of a well-paying job coming out of school

nor the safety blanket of an upper class background. The inability of the average community

26
college student to be able to alleviate the building debt often leads to a lack of confidence and

doubt about one’s future education and life after school with student loan payments kicking in and

no financial stability to combat such costs. The military targets community college students for

this reason. Because military service is associated with certain benefits related to education, the

recruiters can converse with and help students consider the possibility of a financial future that is

not as bleak as the one that they are confronted with in their day-to-day routines. To summarize

this thought-train, it (heavily) appears that the military (and other businesses and governmental

establishments) utilizes the economic class system to strategically place recruiters in the hope of

gaining enlistees, who simply want to relieve some of the stress that comes with economic

stratification and a fundamental lack of resources for lower class citizens.

Class impacted Kelly’s life when she was a waitress. She worked as a waitress on and off

for about 5 years. Education was always really important to her, but she didn’t have the same

educational opportunities as others. Her life chances, or her particular opportunities to improve her

circumstances, were different from a lot of her peers coming out of high school because of her

family background and her family’s financial situation. She had no wealth to be accounted for and

had to develop a decent income by starting with entry-level positions. She made between 20-25k

per year as a waitress and student, placing her in a lower-middle class position.

One aspect to economic stratification that is not as obvious within the other forms of

stratification is the intersectionality between elements that can be directly correlated to one’s

economic class. Intersectionality can be roughly defined as the interaction between several

categories. Because someone needs money to gain resources in American society, a lack of it leads

to an absurdly high amount of directly related conditions. The American Psychological

Association compiled a report showing the effects of lower socioeconomic status on the education

27
of children and adolescents. The study shows that the perception of familial and/or personal

financial strain can significantly enhance emotional distress, depression, and academic status

(Education and Socioeconomic Status). The high school dropout rate for children from lower

economic classes is 16.7%, which is several times higher than the upper class percentage (3.2%)

(Education and Socioeconomic Status). The report also indicates that one’s economic class

negatively impacts the quality of education, the access to quality teachers, behavioral problems

related to learning, and the ability to learn quickly (Education and Socioeconomic Status). Another

study from the American Psychological Association states:

Low SES and its correlates, such as lower education, poverty, and
poor health, ultimately affect our society as a whole. Inequities in
wealth distribution, resource distribution, and quality of life are
increasing in the United States and globally. Society benefits from
an increased focus on the foundations of socioeconomic inequities
and efforts to reduce the deep gaps in socioeconomic status in the
United States and abroad (Work, Stress, and Health &
Socioeconomic Status).

One can logically deduce that being a member of the lower class would increase levels of

stress and impede one’s ability to attain basic, essential items for one’s comfortable living. The

social stratification and unequal distribution of wealth inherent in American society creates severe

workplace stress as it makes one work a job that he or she may not like, causes incredible concern

about the consequences of being unable to maintain one’s employment status, and creates worry

about the constant inflow of bills and payments necessary to retain even a semblance of a decent

life. This workplace stress has been related to many social, health and familial factors (all of these

are illustrations of intersectionality) (Work, Stress, and Health & Socioeconomic Status). For

example, female corrections’ officers and nurses “experience high rates of sexual harassment,

which as (sic) been linked to anxiety, poor concentration, and burnout” (Work, Stress, and Health

& Socioeconomic Status). Women, in certain professions, seem to be undeservedly reaping the

28
consequences of institutionalized class. Workers’ health is also at risk: “Work stress has been

identified as a risk factor for hypertension, diabetes, upper extremity musculoskeletal back

problems, and cardiovascular disease” (Work, Stress, and Health & Socioeconomic Status). Work

stress can cause incredible familial strain:

In addition to workplace social supports, familial support is essential

to the psychological well-being of those under job strain. Those
managing multiple roles may be at added risk of stress due to
competing responsibilities of work and home. Higher incidence of
children with chronic health conditions, learning difficulties, and
childcare issues create the added need for flexibility as parents try
to balance these conflicting responsibilities (Work, Stress, and
Health & Socioeconomic Status).

It is unfortunate that the current American population is only acutely aware of the laundry-

list of negative effects caused by the ever-polarizing class system. Not only does lack of money

create a barrier that denies whole groups of individual’s access to resources that are taken for

granted by those above them, but it also drastically increases the amount of stress that individuals

experience and the health conditions that they develop because of said stress.

Where we land in this economic stratification tends to relate directly to our status in the

hierarchy of Social Class. We all send social cues that allow others to gauge what class we belong

to. People generally want to be perceived as having some amount of wealth and income in the eyes

of others because of the importance we place on the status of higher classes. Cues can include the

style and/or quality of the clothes that you wear, the foods you eat, the styles and brands of things

in your home, and the cars that you drive. These cues lead to a general shared perception of class

that is known as social class.

Let’s go back to Kelly’s situation. Not many people knew how much Kelly actually made,

but many people could tell, by observing certain social cues, that she was in a lower class than

most people aspire to. Many positions in the customer service industry are generally looked down

29
on in our society. Because of this, waiting tables isn’t considered a glamorous job, and indicates a

lower class status. Kelly’s car, living arrangements and clothing choices also acted as an indicator

of her social class status. She owned a manual 1992 Nissan Sentra, a car that was over 20 years

old (the little wealth she had acquired). She shared an apartment with two other single girls in a

poorer location, and they didn’t own much in terms of nice furniture or decorations. She bought a

lot of things second-hand in retro shops (which worked to her advantage in the Portland, Oregon

area where style and class weren’t always synonymous). When she dressed in her server attire to

go to work, she was easily pegged as a person who worked nights and weekends: Not exactly the

coveted schedule of our society.

Often, there are very clear divisions between people at different tiers of the social class

hierarchy. A few years ago, Kelly met a guy that was later nicknamed “Scott Harvard”, and he

took her on a couple dates. It was during the second date that education came up. He had gotten

his doctorate from Harvard, had gone on to complete dental school at OHSU and was clearly very

proud of it. When she told him about how she was currently working toward her cosmetology

license, he laughed and said, “When are you going to get a real education?” That was their last

date. While it was clear from their conversations that both valued education, economic

stratification and social class became clear dividers between Scott Harvard and Kelly. His family

income and wealth had allowed him greater opportunities and resources and those opportunities

planted him into an upper-middle class position. He drove a nicer car, had a nicer apartment, and

had connections and credentials that afforded him many more opportunities and a much higher

income than she had.

30
Gender

An important distinction between sex and gender must be understood. When referring to

sex, in the proper usage of the word, one is identifying the combination of biological characteristics

that indicate whether one is male or female (these words will be used to denote biological sex).

According to the American Psychological Association, “There are a number of indicators of

biological sex, including sex chromosomes, gonads, internal reproductive organs, and external

genitalia” (Definition 1). Gender, while not entirely unrelated to sex, is often incorrectly assumed

to be sex. In other words, people often think that gender and sex are the same. Unfortunately, this

is a wildly inaccurate assertion. The American Psychological Association states, “Gender refers to

the attitudes, feelings, and behaviors that a given culture associates with a person’s biological sex”

(Definition 1)

The analogy of a can of soup, while seemingly silly, does a surprisingly suitable job at

visualizing the relationship between gender and sex. Sex is like the soup within the can, whereas

gender is the label on the exterior of the can. Is there any correlation between the two items? Of

course there is: the label on the can is meant to denote the internal contents of the can, the soup.

In a similar fashion, gender is a label attached to an individual, which, oftentimes, corresponds to

his or her biological sex.

While the concept of sex is simply part of nature, gender is socially constructed. The Social

Construction of Gender refers to the expectations associated with gender, as well as, the patterns

of behavior and physical characteristics associated with each gender. We deem these socially

constructed because they are entirely ideological; there is no factual information indisputably

connecting behavioral conditions and biological sex.

31
 As with any social construct, gender is riddled with inconsistencies and misrepresentations.

While it is perfectly acceptable for men to enjoy and promote sex, women are expected to refrain

from actions that could be interpreted as promiscuous. Any woman who outspokenly admits her

sexual exploits or even implies that she is open to such experiences, whether it be verbally or by

wardrobe, is instantly labeled “slut” or “skank” or “whore” or “tramp” (this is just the tip of the

iceberg for insults related to sexually expressive women [fun exercise: try thinking of a single

derogatory term directed at sexually-celebratory men]). Women are often thought of as less strong,

both emotionally and physically. They are often expected to cry in emotional situations, whereas

men are supposed to keep their tear ducts dry. The physical strength of men is purportedly much

greater than that of women, who are viewed by society as delicate, innocent beings.

Once one begins to group individuals together, it is inevitable that a hierarchy will begin

to form. No collection of separate units (within the same overall platform or medium) can coexist

in equality forever. Eventually, a power struggle (often driven by subconscious impulses) creates

a gap in opportunities, resources, and positions between factions. Therefore, by logical

progression, some gender groups will have better access to assets and jobs than others. This idea

is term Gender Stratification.

Under modern conditions, the overall narrative points to men being higher than women on

the gender hierarchy. According to Jennifer E. Manning, a research specialist for the Congressional

Research Service, a total of 108 women (20% of total membership) hold congressional seats in the

federal government, which is, historically, a record high (7). These numbers breakdown to show

88 women (four of whom are delegates) in the House and 20 women in the Senate (Manning 7).

The fact that these numbers indicate the best representation that women have ever had in the federal

Congress should cause extreme distress.

32
 The state government platform is equally dire for women. As of 2013, only 35 women

governors had been elected since the inception of the United States (Carroll 428). Since then, two

more female governors have been elected, which still only leaves six female governors out of fifty

potential positions (Current Governors). This means that women only hold 12% of all (not

including any other non-state territories) United States’ governor positions. The Center for

American Women and Politics (sponsored by Rutgers University) indicates that women only hold

24.7% of all statewide executive elected offices, governor included (Current Numbers). Women

hold 1,804 State Legislature positions, which is a total of 24.4% of all such seats (Current

Numbers). Women comprise 22.3% of state senate officials and 25.2% of state house/assembly

members (Current Numbers). The lowness of such figures trickles all the way down to the local

levels of government as women only hold 18.4% of mayor positions that oversee a region with a

population of 30,000 people or more (Current Numbers).

With statistics like this, women understandably feel ostracized and marginalized in the

world of political representation. The themes of Institutionalized Gender seem to be flowing

through the political sphere. Institutionalized Gender can be seen when the concept of gender

stratification has also become part of today’s society”. One institution that is heavily affected by

gender roles is the family. The roles of mother and father, for example, have been constructed in

detail by society. Women, for instance, are thought to be more connected with babies and children

than men are, and are assumed to take responsibility for their children’s wellbeing. Men also have

stereotypical roles that they are expected to play. They are often expected to work long hours to

support the financial needs of the family, and while they are responsible for some childcare, it’s

the women who take on most of the burden. As we all know, this is not a formula that works

always. Many mothers assume the role of breadwinner, and father the role of full time caretaker.

33
But there is still a strong pull in this direction for some people. This is because gender and its many

repercussions are built into the very foundations of our society, and into the back of most people’s

minds.

But not little Deanna. For the first part of Deanna’s childhood, she was an only child, so

she did not have anyone to play with. There were kids her age that lived in her neighborhood, but

they were mostly boys with cooties. Deanna’s mother was usually too exhausted to play with her

daughter: she was busy taking care of her grandmother that was extremely ill at the time. Deanna’s

father, on the other hand, was never too busy to have a little fun with her; they spent a great amount

of time together. Deanna would “help” fix cars, mow the lawn, fix the plumbing, and many other

things that men and their sons would do together. He called Deanna his “little helper.” One day,

Deanna’s mother noticed that Deanna was playing with her father’s tools instead of her dusty

dollhouse. She bought Deanna a new dollhouse to play with. To her surprise, Deanna just looked

at the new Barbie’s Dream House and ran back to the garage to play with the tools. Deanna’s

mother was perplexed and upset! She knew that this is not normal for a girl to prefer to play with

men’s tools than Barbies. By rejecting these stereotypically “feminine” toys, Deanna was going

against a gender expectation that has developed over centuries. Deanna’s mother, being fully aware

of the gravity of gender roles, reacted firmly to her daughter’s nonconformity.

Another, similar example of the importance of gender roles is Richard’s passion for dance.

Growing up, Richard had a great interest in dancing because of the fact that it was constantly

around him. He had two older brothers who were aspiring musicians, so he was surrounded by

music. Richard started to dance when he was in elementary school; he use to imitate dance moves

from Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera, but his parents stopped him from dancing because it

was too feminine, and a boy had no business doing such girly stuff. Richard’s parent’s behavior

34
toward his love for dancing prevented him to living out his passion for dance as well as caused

him to start questioning his identity at a young age. In our society, a man acting in a way that is

considered feminine is culturally uncommon. So uncommon that Richard’s parents were unwilling

to bear the consequential social pressure.

In addition, any trip through the hygiene and clothing sections of a supermarket chain will

cause one to notice numerous examples of just how far gender stereotypes have spread. In these

stores, clothing is always divided into sections for men and women because, as a society, the

expectations for what men and women should wear is markedly different. While there is some

overlap between the two (for instance, a woman wearing a men’s flannel would probably not cause

too much of an uproar), the materials, colors, and items are very different in each section. Several

items for women are meant to be tighter and more form-fitting, usually made from material that

has the ability to stretch to the figure of one’s body. Clothing for men is meant to be loose and

more comfortable, probably because the societal stereotype is that men do lots of physical labor,

therefore they must be comfortable and have durable clothes. Women’s clothing is often lighter in

color than men’s items, with differing patterns meant to emphasize cultural gender stereotypes (a

flower pattern on a shirt is a great example of how even clothing items attempt to illustrate the

“delicateness” of women). Hygienic items (shampoos, stick deodorants, body sprays, etc.) while

not divided into men’s and women’s aisles, also reinforce standard, patterned gender ideals. Like

clothing, hygiene items for women are often lighter in color (pink for women vs. red and black for

men) with lacey, flowing lettering for female-intended products. More masculine items are dark

in color and often utilize bold lettering. The scents of the items for each gender are also distinct

from one another: Shampoos and deodorants labeled “for women” often smell “fruitier” or

35
“sweeter;” whereas, items for men are often much stronger and muskier than their feminine

counterparts.

Gendered cultural expectations impact many people in many different ways. For example,

when Vanessa was in middle school, her dad took a trip to Russia with a church group to sing

songs and give fellowship to orphans. He was there for two weeks and once he returned home, he

had brought her gifts she was dying to see. He got her a lot of cool little knick-knacks that she still

has today. One very in particular item was a bracelet he got her. Her dad told her it was a unisex

bracelet, which means that both men and women could wear it without judgement. It’s a light

brown, almost tan color made from thick string with pieces that have different symbols on them.

She really liked it and she still wears it every now and then. She thought it was the coolest thing

ever at the time so she wore it to school. She was so excited to show all her girlfriends her bracelet

but when she did, they didn’t seem as excited as she was about it. One of friend asked her if it was

a boy’s bracelet and then she started to realize that none of her girlfriends were interested in the

bracelet because it looked a little manly. Though she still wore the bracelet, it took her a while to

notice that girls in middle school liked pink and glittery things. It wasn’t until up in high school

when girls grew out of the “everything has to look cute” stage and then some girls then too got

into more edgy things. This applies to sex and gender because she is a girl and it was expected of

her to wear girly things. Society has put on such bias judgement to males and females. Just because

a bracelet looked like something of what a guy would wear, doesn’t mean that Vanessa couldn’t

wear it. Although there is a distinction between boys and girls, that doesn’t mean that girls have to

be limited to certain things or that boys need to be limited to certain things. Some boys like to go

to dance classes and some girls like to take boxing.

36
 Marriage can be affected by gender roles. The roles of a wife and a husband is different.

For example, women are expected to cook and clean for their husbands while their husbands

provide for them financially. Men are expected to be the hard workers of the family while the

women stay at home. Eventually a wife would have kids and she would be expected to nurture

them. For example, women, for instance, are thought to be more connected with babies and

children then men are, and are assumed to take responsibility for their children’s wellbeing”.

Society doesn’t expect men to take on the role of a woman because they believe that he’s not

supposed to. Women shouldn’t financially provide the family while men stay at home because

that’s not an expectation society has.

When Carol was younger, her mother bought her many dolls. She expected Carol to play

with dolls a lot because she was a girl. She was the only child so her childhood friends were mostly

boys and because of that she would break the dolls’ heads off and cut their hair and go watch

WWE. Her mother would be upset and even exclude her from watching wrestling because she

thought it was for boys and that Carol needed to be doing feminine things such as playing with

dolls and playing make-up. Carol preferred to play male-dominated sports and male-dominated

shows because she was interested and because she felt like girls can do what boys do. Her mother

would try her best to make do what other girls do but it only made Carol stubborn. She would have

rather been on punishment than play with dolls any day.

Almost every industry, in some way, conforms to gender-pandering. In fact, the argument

could be made that there is no discernible way to fully disintegrate the gender stereotypes that

permeate American society. While debate of the origin of gender norms still rages on, it is clear

that the very industries that are responsible for driving the economy are, in equal parts, guilty of

portraying women (and, occasionally, men) in false and demeaning ways, attempting to

37
consolidate the behaviors of billions into a few generic categories. From this perspective, it is

evident that there are smaller factions of institutionalized gender throughout American business,

which helps to reinforce the larger societal-encompassing institutionalized gender and gender

stratification that halts progressive ideas and refrains from granting equal access to resources for

all parties.

The most notorious example of inadequate, inequivalent distribution of and access to

financial resources is the gender wage gap. Plenty of research has been conducted on the topic of

men’s vs. women’s wages and the overwhelming consensus is that men make significantly more

than women, even within the same education level. The American Association of University

Women (AAUW) published a report entitled “The Simple Truth About The Gender Pay Gap (Fall

2015)” in which the organization compiles and charts statistics related to the gender wage gap.

The wage gap in relation to education is shown here:

38
Source: http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/

According to the above-statistics, there is at least a 20% gap between men and women at each

academic level (The Simple Truth). The AAUW also demonstrates collected data on the gender

wage gap within each state:

39
40
Source: http://www.aauw.org/research/the-simple-truth-about-the-gender-pay-gap/

As calculated by the graph, the overall wage gap for the entire country is 21% (100-79)

(The Simple Truth). There is much speculation on what type of factors cause such a drastic drop

off between two equally educated people, with only gender differences between the two. While it

seems unlikely this economic gender stratification is entirely caused by gender stereotypes, it is

suspect to discredit the expected roles and behavior of women (portrayed in the media) as being a

nonfactor. The ideas, partially reinforced by media, that women are less competent, emotionally

and physically dependent on men, and professionally unmotivated are certainly a huge component

of the contributing factors that lead to such a massive economic divide going unchecked. Gender

ideals, when gone uncorrected, lead to an undeniably frustrating and unnecessary inconsistency

within society.

The social construction of gender is extremely important, considering it impacts nearly

every aspect of our lives. The expectations of men and women that society has created determine

not only how we think and act, but also much of what we do, such as our jobs. Gender stratification

has created a power-based hierarchy in which men and women are ranked, and this hierarchy is

what gender roles are based on.

Race

The term race refers to groups of people who have differences and similarities in biological

traits deemed by society to be socially significant, meaning that people treat other people

differently because of those traits. For instance, while differences and similarities in eye color have

not been treated as socially significant, differences and similarities in skin color have. Although

some scholars have attempted to establish dozens of racial groupings for the peoples of the world,

41
others have suggested four or five. An example of a racial category is Asian, with its associated

facial, hair color, and body type features. Yet too many exceptions to this sort of racial grouping

have been found to make any racial categorizations truly viable. This fact has led many sociologists

to indicate that no clear‐cut races exist—only assorted physical and genetic variations across

human individuals and groups. Certainly, obvious physical differences—some of which are

inherited—exist between humans. But how these variations form the basis for social prejudice and

discrimination has nothing to do with genetics but rather with a social phenomenon related to

outward appearances. In addition to these biological differences, meanings and expectations have

also been attached to race by our society, which is what is referred to as the Social Construction

of Race.

The harm that comes in categorizing people based on purely external qualities is that,

inevitably, certain groups rise, culturally, above others. When a kind of hierarchy forms from the

expected behavior patterns of, and attitudes toward, races, Racial Stratification has occurred.

What makes racial stratification so disturbing is that it creates challenges in relation to gaining

certain resources (and, sometimes, basic human rights) for those who are deemed to be lower on

the racial ladder. Racial stratification, like every other kind of stratification, creates a sense of

superiority in those who occupy the upper strata. The arrogance associated with self-proclaimed

superiority negatively (and, occasionally, fatally) impacts the attitudes and stereotypes that are

heaped onto the perceived “lesser” groups. Once these attitudes have multiplied throughout society

and impacted the way that the overall population acts and thinks, Institutionalized race has been

established.

America is no stranger to extreme racism and institutionalized race. Obviously, slavery is

an irremovable stain on the history of this country and segregation is probably the most infamous

42
example of racial stratification in American history. In fact, even the first American cinematic

epic, The Birth of a Nation, has been described by NPR as “three hours of racist propaganda —

starting with the Civil War and ending with the Ku Klux Klan riding in to save the South from

black rule during the Reconstruction era” (NPR Staff). While it was assumed that the Civil Rights

movement was the final step toward equality for all races, many forms of racial bias, leading to

racial stratification and institutionalized race, still permeate modern American society. Eugene

Jarecki’s marvelous documentary The House I Live In provides an exhaustive look at the United

States’ War on Drugs, including how it has been used to discriminate (whether this discrimination

was intentional or just a by-product of cultural stereotypes is still up for debate) against racial

minorities. The film indicates that Ronald Reagan, whether it was through misinformation or

blatant disregard for the facts, established an absurdly high mandatory minimum on crack cocaine,

as compared to powder cocaine, when there is ultimately nothing different in the harmful or

addictive properties within the two (The House I Live In). The United States Sentencing

Commission expands on this point: “The Act established what has come to be known as a 100-to-

1 quantity ratio between the two forms of cocaine. It takes one hundred times as much powder

cocaine to trigger the same mandatory penalties as for a given amount of crack. For example, a

person convicted of selling 500 grams of powder cocaine is subject to the same five-year minimum

sentence as a person selling 5 grams of crack cocaine” (Report on Cocaine and Federal Sentencing

Policy). On a side note, the sentence was drastically reduced from 100:1 to 18:1 (still relatively

high) in 2010 by the Obama administration (Fair Sentencing Act). How does this relate to the

concept of racial stratification? The places within which crack cocaine was most prevalent were

areas within which racial minorities lived (The House I Live In). This has led to much speculation

about Reagan’s motives for implementing such regulations, as well as, the discrimination that has

43
directly resulted from his policies (The House I Live In). PBS, in a timeline of the American War

on Drugs, states, in its 1986 section, “Mandatory minimums become increasingly criticized over

the years for promoting significant racial disparities in the prison population, because of the

differences in sentencing for crack vs. powder cocaine” (Thirty Years of America’s Drug War).

This is not the only way that drugs in America have been used to discriminate, racially, against

those who are lower on the hierarchy.

It is almost certain that drug laws and the focus of criminal investigations related to these

laws have unfairly targeted races that are lower on the stratification pyramid. The Drug Policy

Alliance comments on the wealth of data that supports this premise:

Although rates of drug use and selling are comparable across racial
lines, people of color are far more likely to be stopped, searched,
arrested, prosecuted, convicted and incarcerated for drug law
violations than are whites. Higher arrest and incarceration rates for
African Americans and Latinos are not reflective of increased
prevalence of drug use or sales in these communities, but rather of a
law enforcement focus on urban areas, on lower-income
communities and on communities of color as well as inequitable
treatment by the criminal justice system (Race and the Drug War).

The statistics tell the same narrative. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services

Administration annually publishes a report on the previous year’s drug use statistics. The 2014

report (analyzing 2013 statistics [unfortunately, this is the most recent report to include in-depth

statistics on race, although it is doubtful that a huge shift would have occurred within a two year

period]) has this to say about drug use between races in 2013, “There were no statistically

significant differences in the rates of current illicit drug use between 2012 and 2013 for any of the

racial/ethnic groups” (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 26). They also

provide further numerical data, which states that drug use among each race looks something like

this:

44
  Asians: 3.1%

 Hispanics: 8.8%

 Caucasian: 9.5%

 African-Americans: 10.5%

 Native Americans and Alaskan Natives: 12.3%

 Native Hawaiians: 14.0%

(Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration 26).

The U.S. Department of Justice provided a report, written by E. Ann Carson, on the status

of 2014 inmates, in which they provide a detailed breakdown of the race of drug offenders in state

and federal prison. The numbers on the state level show that, as of December 31, 2013, the numbers

of incarcerated drug offenders are surprisingly quite diverse: “The percentage of white (15%),

black (16%), and Hispanic (15%) state prisoners sentenced for drug offenses were similar (Carson

16)”. The numbers on the federal level, however, indicate that there is, in fact, a massive racial

undertone to drug convictions. White drug offenders composed 40.3% of the white federal prison

population of 51,600 (Carson 16). Black drug offenders make up more 52.5% of the black federal

prison population 71,300 (Carson 16). Hispanic drug offenders consisted of 56.9% of all federal

Hispanic prisoners (63,700) (Carson 16). This equals 20,795 white prisoners, 37,433 black

prisoners, and 36,245 Hispanic prisoners. Because, as previously established, there is no real

discrepancy in the percentage of drug users across races, something else must be factoring into

this equation, in order for there to be such a large gap between black and Hispanic prisoners and

their white counterparts. One could counter that maybe this is a representative portion of the

population and that the increased number of non-white prisoners is just because there are more

45
people who are of black and Hispanic origin than there are white people. The data from the United

States Census Bureau does not support this, however. As of July 1, 2014, the Census shows that

white people compose 62.1% of the total population (this is including only those who reported

white with no Hispanic origin [If those of Hispanic origin were also included the percentage would

be 77.4%]) (QuickFacts). Those who reported Hispanic or Latino origin numbered 17.4% of the

population and African Americans were calculated to be 13.2% of the population (QuickFacts).

With Caucasians composing the majority of the population and drug use being constant across all

perceived racial divides, how can such a gap in drug arrests exist? At this point, it should be clear

that institutionalized race is a massive structure within the justice system.

The origin of such prejudicial behavior is not clear, but there should be no doubt that the

lawmakers of the past (and some in the present) have orchestrated a legal way for law enforcement

to discriminate against racially-different, lower-class neighborhoods under the false stereotype

(one that is rampant within American institutionalized race) that people in these areas abuse drugs

more often than those in more affluent towns. It is a vicious, unfortunate cycle for these individuals

as they are purposely sought out, then arrested, which serves to validate the “minority criminal”

stereotype in the minds of law enforcement and cause even more harassment and incarceration

within these communities. Being a member of a racial minority instantly increases one’s chances

of being stopped, searched, or purposely watched by law enforcement, simply because racial

stratification has enforced false ideals, which have become part of a national form of

institutionalized race.

Even after serving a lengthy prison sentence, many drug offenders may be refused certain

opportunities and resources:

The life-long penalties and exclusions that follow a drug conviction

have created a permanent second-class status for millions of

46
 Americans, who may be prohibited from voting, being licensed,
accessing public assistance and any number of other activities and
opportunities. The drug war’s racist enforcement means that all of
these exclusions fall more heavily on people and communities of
color (Race and the Drug War).

The Drug Policy Alliance, in another article entitled Drug Law Convictions and

Punishments, elaborates even more on the inability of drug convicts to acquire basic assets:

“Incarcerating people for nonviolent drug offenses destroys lives, because with a criminal

conviction under your belt, it isn’t easy to get a job, and you’re not eligible for student loans, which

doesn’t leave a lot of legal options open for a productive life.” The very essence of racial

stratification is evident here as a systemic, racially-based lack of access and inability to acquire

resources is pushed forward into the public’s perception. These citizens, without adequate

employment, essentially have no real options (besides continuing in a crime-based life), effectively

eliminating any hope the individual had of escaping his or her low-income situation and moving

up the economic class system. In this way, drug laws and the way they are enforced are indicative

of institutionalized race. Those who are part of racial minorities are considered, by law

enforcement and political parties, to be more dangerous and more likely to consume and be in

possession of illegal drugs, which no statistical evidence supports.

When such beliefs are accepted to be true, it sets a dangerous precedent that can lead to

increased deaths in certain communities. The Washington Post, in the article Fatal Police

Shootings in 2015 Approaching 400 nationwide, (this article was published in May, so the

statistics, at this point in the year, are probably much higher) examined and compiled data related

to police shootings. Kimberly Kindy, the author of the article, summarized the role of race in police

shootings with a troubling paragraph, “About half the victims were white, half minority. But the

demographics shifted sharply among the unarmed victims, two-thirds of whom were black or

47
Hispanic. Overall, blacks were killed at three times the rate of whites or other minorities when

adjusting by the population of the census tracts where the shootings occurred.” The unarmed

portion is of particular importance to the topic of institutionalized race and the stereotypes that

racial minorities are characterized to possess. With two-thirds of unarmed police shootings being

African-Americans and Hispanics (the same demographics that are wrongfully targeted for drug

crimes), it does appear that the idea that Hispanics and African-Americans are more dangerous has

manifested itself into the police force. If an officer has been pre-programmed to accept the false

premise that these racial categories are more likely to be criminals, it should seem logical that an

officer will resort to deadly force much sooner and more often with these groups, even if his own

life is not threatened. While this statistic is sad, it should not be surprising given the attitudes

toward and actions against these very minorities. Examining the overall police shootings (unarmed

and armed), there is still a racially based narrative occurring:

48
Source:https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/fatal-police-shootings-in-2015-approaching-

400-nationwide/2015/05/30/d322256a-058e-11e5-a428-c984eb077d4e_story.html

Using the numbers in this chart, white men and women account for 180 of all police

shootings (Kindy). Black men and women equal 105 of all police shooting cases and Hispanics

consist of 57 cases. (Kindy) With 385 total police shootings, this means that white-victim

49
shootings compose approximately 46.75% of all occurrences. Hispanic and African American-

victim shootings, however, are 42.08% of instances. While there are more shootings of Caucasian

males than other races, there is a very narrow percentage gap (approx. 4.5%) between the two.

Referring back to the population data will give one a clearer picture of the injustice occurring here.

Caucasians are 62.1% of the total population, while Hispanics and African-Americans are a

combined 30.6% of the population, slightly more than a 2:1 ratio (QuickFacts). Clearly, the overall

shooting percentages are not reminiscent of the population. In fact, the very tiny difference

between Caucasian shootings and Hispanic/African-American shootings further validates the idea

that African-Americans and Hispanics are targeted by police and incorrectly stereotyped nationally

as more dangerous and more likely to be violent. Unfortunately, it seems that this institutionalized

race has attacked the very consciousness of the nation and warped the way that racial minorities

are viewed. In direct consequence, this has caused many members of smaller racial groups to be

targeted by police investigations more than their white counterparts and, furthermore, to be the

victims of a disproportionate number of fatal police shootings. Hopefully, this information will

serve as a demonstration of just how harmful racial stratification and institutionalized race is.

Another example of how institutionalized race works is in the housing market. The creation

of the suburbs in the United States was driven by public policy and taxpayer money. The GI Bill

through the VHA (Veterans Health Administration) opened the opportunity to purchase a home to

millions of veterans after World War II (Guess, 53). However, of all the home loans made in those

boom years, less than 2% went to non-whites. Meanwhile, the federal government set up lending

standards and created "red lining." "Red" districts had low insurability because people of color

lived in those areas (Guess, 53). White communities were seen as "good risks," and hence lenders

50
did not offer mortgages in red lined districts (Guess, 53). These practices excluded people who

were not white from the home ownership market.

The implication of this one set of policies has had (and still has) massive ramifications. For

the majority of people in the United States, their home is their single most important form of

wealth. The exclusion of people of color from the housing market meant that only whites had that

access to this form of wealth. Getting and owning a home became a "privilege" of being white.

Meanwhile, much school funding is still financed through local property taxes. Since people of

color were concentrated in areas where they could not own homes (or the homes they owned were

devalued) there was less money for schools - degrading educational opportunities. Meanwhile, for

whites who had moved "out and up," their schools had more funding and were seen as better

schools. Quality of education relates to economic opportunity, and those who were left behind ran

even further behind. None of this has anything directly to do with individual bias. Rather it is the

consequence of a social policy where whites, acting rationally in their own best interests,

participated in increasing levels of inequality between the races.

Conclusion

The harm that social stratification inflicts on society and those within it is too great to verbally

express. The concept, at its worst, causes those who are unfairly demeaned and targeted to deemed

dangerous and, occasionally, killed because of this stereotype. The problem with social

stratification is that it is ideological and immaterial; therefore, a better distribution of physical

resources is not enough to correct it. Instead, it seems that the only way to eliminate social, and its

counterpart institutionalized, stratification is a change in social and individual mindsets. It is only

through education and careful correction that social stratification can be defeated.

51
 Chapter 3:
The Sociological Imagination
As we learned in Chapter 1, Sociology is the study of society and individuals and that in

order to really understand individuals, we should also work to understand the society around them.

In order to study sociology, a person must develop a skill called the sociological imagination.

The Sociological Imagination

The sociological imagination defines itself in many different concepts that all intertwine

within one another – integrating social, biographical and historical factors to expand on a situation

or an issue being addressed. By putting these three factors into consideration, we are able to step

outside our own self-centered, limited view on things and instead, figure out how: 1) socially, our

personal problems connect to other people on a larger scale and perhaps through the awareness, a

solution will be formed, 2) Historically, how past events have led up and contributed to the current

situation of things, and 3) biographically, how personal life experiences add to a situation or the

issue being addressed.

C. Wright Mills defined his own concept of the sociological imagination as “the vivid

awareness of the relationship between personal experience and the wider society.” An analogy that

can help us better understand what Mills meant by the sociological imagination is the thought of a

fish swimming in the ocean. That fish is surrounded by water, but the water is so familiar and

common to the fish that, if asked to describe its situation, the fish could hardly be expected to

describe the water as well. Similarly, we all live in a social milieu, but because we are so intimately

familiar with it, we cannot easily study it objectively. The sociological imagination takes the

52
metaphorical fish out of the water. It allows us to look at ourselves and our social surroundings in

a reflective way and to question the things we have always taken for granted. Apart from

understanding how factors like biography and society play out in formulating our sociological

imagination, it is equally important to understand what each of these terms mean independently

and to delve further into other factors that equally contribute to creating the sociological

imagination and understand what each of them mean as entities on their own.

The sociological imagination is the skill and understanding of biography, history and

society. It is the different perspectives of people and how you interact with society based on your

experiences as an individual and part of a group. Allowing a person to understand who they are,

how they fit into what surrounds them, and how it affects everyone they come in contact with. It

is what fuels the interactions between oneself and others as well as understanding that the past

affects the future. It allows a person to unlock the potential within themselves by observing the

world around them and connecting their own experiences with someone else’s. It helps oneself to

break free from the social norms of their lives and experience new perspectives.

To have a better understanding of a person and why they act a certain way one must

consider the circumstances in which events occur and the setting of a person's surroundings.

Context is the stuff around an individual or individual situation that helps us to understand the

individual or situation. Context gives reason to why people are the way they are. Few things can

be completely understood without also taking in account the context. Context informs the

sociological imagination through context clues. A person’s parents, hometown, and even their

religion are all context clues, along with biography, history, and society. While using the

sociological imagination with context, one can understand why we act the way we act and think

53
the way we think. Context informs someone’s sociological imagination. Two examples of

someone’s context is their parents or their hometown.

For example, Michael coming out of the closet was not accepted in the area in which he

grew up. In order to feel more comfortable, Michael feels that New York City would be a more

appropriate place to live. New York City is a better context because it is more accepting of his

sexuality and has a large gay community. His family accepts him but the society in which they live

does not. This connects to the sociological imagination as well because he was raised to speak his

mind by his parents, but taught to quiet down by society, which is why he is not comfortable with

his sexuality today. If he moved to New York City, this change in context might allow him to

flourish into the proud man that he is inside.

Daquan grew up in a rough part of Brooklyn, living with his elderly aunt since the age of

eight. There were men who would stand on the corner and deal drugs. Gangs fought and killed

each other over territory. This is Daquan’s context, the circumstances in which he was placed. His

context affected his life immensely. Because Daquan lived in a society like this, he became

accustomed to such things, and even thought they were acceptable. Daquan didn’t have much

guidance; it was up to him to motivate himself. At the age of sixteen, he began to engage in these

activities such as fighting, smoking marijuana, and robbing people. Such activities got Daquan

arrested on four separate occasions, although luckily for him, he was never put in jail. His friend

on the other hand wasn’t so lucky… One of his friends was shot and killed due to gang violence.

In light of this tragedy, he then realized he needed to remove himself from the environment.

Daquan now attends Tompkins Cortland Community College. Though it’s sad what he went

through, it ultimately gave him the motivation to change the context of his life.

54
 Amanda has a story that illustrates how two people raised in different contexts can have

very different viewpoints on a subject. Her parents fight about money constantly. It’s not that they

don’t have any, in fact, they have earned themselves a pretty comfortable position in the upper

middle class, yet they constantly bicker about how money is being spent. Specifically, how it is

spent on their two adult children. Her parents come from fairly different backgrounds and the

availability of money and how it was spent was very different in both of their experiences. Her

mother was raised in a first generation immigrant household that placed a high value on education.

Her mother’s parents had limited means but they understood the value of helping their children

financially as they got their feet under them. Eventually her mother and uncles all graduated with

science degrees, moved out and did well for themselves. It only took a few stints of living in her

grandparent’s basement and a few personal loans but eventually it happened.

Amanda’s father’s family on the other hand had lived many generations in the same valley working

as farmers and tradespeople. It was a little more hardscrabble then the way her mother was raised,

and when her dad and his brothers left the house that was it. No help. Figure it out. Do it on your

own. There was no money to give. Education was not valued as much as hard work. As a result,

there is definitely a range of success on her dad’s side of the family. Some did well; others now

live on assistance.

Her parents differing attitudes towards the money they’ve earned, and their very different

ideas on how they should approach supporting their children, totally reflects the context in which

they were brought up. It took her a long time to understand why there was so much conflict

surrounding the issue but when you take in the biographies and history of the two sides of the

family, it makes much more sense.

55
 The way that we put together context to study sociology is observing three fundamental

elements: Biography, History, and Society. History + Society = Context. Using context can help

provide insight of why people act the way they do as well as allowing a deeper connection to be

made with an individual or group.

Society

Society is a group of individuals that share similar values, beliefs, and traditions or a large

social group that share the same geographic, political views, and expectations. In many cases, our

society helps shape and molds our thoughts, personality and identity because we are strongly

influence by the cultural realities of our society.

For example when Richard first moved to Dryden for college from New York City he faced

many difficulties in the beginning of his transition. The two environments were completely

different even though they were in the same state. They were two different societies one was rural

and the other was urban. When he moved to Dryden, he quickly picked up on the differences from

the fast upbeat movement of being in the city to being close to farms. The change between different

societies affected Richard personally. He was no longer worried about being late on the train but

was now worried about waiting for a cab into the closest town. Instead of worrying about what

time the bodega closes he was worrying about how to get to Wal-Mart. In addition, when it came

down to his sexual orientation in the city, he was able to walk around without fear of being able to

fully express himself, however, in a small town he doesn’t see much openness. In the city since

there are more homosexuals and people who support gay rights. Seeing gay people on 5th Ave.

has become a social norm, but in Dryden where homosexuals are the minority, it is less likely to

be accepted.

56
 Deanna’s parents are from the Ukraine. Before Deanna’s parents immigrated to the US,

things were not easy. The Communist Soviet Union had a large impact on Ukraine, and there were

many restrictions. For example, as mentioned before, practicing Christianity was forbidden. Also,

there was much less access to both higher education and the means to afford it. Ukraine was a

society shaped in part by the turbulence of Soviet dominion. In the US, there was much more

access to higher education, and in general more freedom to pursue a life of independence and

prosperity. If a product or service is available, it can be bought fairly easily, given the necessary

funds are exchanged. Because of these drastic differences in society, Deanna, unlike her parents,

was able to make the decision to attend college.

History

History is a factual recounting of past events, usually describing trends or major events on

a societal level. History is an essential form of context when analyzing the motivations of an

individual, or a group. By evaluating the events leading up to an event, we may see the event as

much more reasonable, and understand the inconspicuous influence that the past can have on

individual and communal psyche.

History directly affects everything in our world. For example, the security precautions in

place in buildings such as airports have a history. Airports were not always so uptight about things,

until after the destruction of the Twin Towers. September 11, 2001 brought a huge wake up call

for America. Everyone thought they were safe, until proven wrong. After that horrific event,

airports now go to the extent of requiring each person to remove their shoes at security while they

are being scanned before boarding the plane. Had it not been for the History between the USA and

Al Qaeda, people would still be able to wear their shoes through the metal detectors. This directly

57
affects the individual person, because now when a person has a flight to catch, they must remove

their shoes. Groups of people are also affected, because now everyone must take off their footwear

before boarding a plane. This means that security procedures due to 9/11 terrorist attacks have

added on extra time for people before going through to their gate. This makes the whole travelling

experience more complicated, and takes more time than it would have taken had there been no

terrorist attacks.

In 1973, Ukraine was under Soviet control. During this time, there were harsh restrictions

on what religions could be practiced within Ukraine. It was a crime to be Christian, so worshippers

were forced to congregate in private, always fearing that they would be found out and arrested.

Deanna’s family dealt with the blunt edge of these abominable policies; in fact, Deanna’s great

grandmother was arrested and put in jail for being Christian. Soon after, she gave birth to Deanna’s

grandmother in jail. Some years later, Deanna’s grandfather wanted strongly to leave Ukraine in

search of religious freedom, but couldn’t. A soviet security agency had called the KJB and

threatened anyone who planned to leave. Eventually, after Mikhail Gorbachev became president

of the Soviet Union, the mobility restrictions began to lift. Deanna’s family took their chance,

finding a sponsor in America that would help them financially and give them a place to stay until

they got their footing. Being just a generation away from such struggle, it is no wonder that Deanna

is ready and willing to go to college. Partly because of her rich family and country history, Deanna

understands the value of education as a resource, and is excited to take advantage of it.

Biography

A biography is an account of a person's life. Anyone, of any age, can be the subject of a

biography. It is a collection of stories or experiences that are perceived to be important by an

58
individual or group. Biographies explore the events in a person’s life and find meaning within

them. Some authors also write autobiographies and biographies about other people. These works

tell the life story of someone, with the hope of understanding more deeply their motivations,

setbacks, etc. Sociologists use biography in the same way; it is used to better understand an

individual’s behavior as a result of the experiences they were faced with.

For an example, Morgan is strongly in favor of individuals getting a college degree. The

reason Morgan feels that way is because she has seen both her parents and brother struggle in this

day and time without a college degree. Her parents are both self-employed with no retirement and

no health benefits because they did not further their education. Her parents do well for themselves

but they could do even better with a college degree. She feels that if anyone has the chance to

pursue a college education they should do so. Understanding Morgan’s parents’ experiences helps

us understand her need and our society’s greater emphasis on college education in our generation.

Deanna’s biography provides insight into her decisions. After coming to America, her

parents could not afford to continue their education. Instead, they had to work. Her father worked

at a factory as she grew up, where he was exposed to many harmful chemicals, and where he had

to work long hours. Her mother spent much of her time learning English and raising Deanna. Her

family’s biography helps us to understand her motivation to get a college education.

The time period in which someone lives and the experiences that they have had because of

it is also an example of the impact of biography. For example, Kenjia places one 18 year old

behind a door and another 38 year old behind another door. A 22 year old is asked which person

will text you back the fastest, the 18 year old or the 38 year old. More than likely the 18 year old

would be chosen because the 38 year old did not have as much access to the same technology as

the 18 year old and the technology was not as advanced when their individual history was being

59
formed. This century’s technological advances make texting more accessible to the 18 year old.

The sociological imagination explains that the environment of the 18 year old differs greatly than

that of the 38 year old. Society thinks that the younger generation is smarter technologically than

the older generation that did not have access to computers while in school.

Groups within a society can also have a shared biography. For example, African Americans

have a significantly different biography as a whole than White Americans. There are different

cultures and family habits between the two. The group biography of African Americans as a group

is generally something like: enslaved from Africa in 1619, then sent on a boat to America, then

served as slaves until 1865, then were free Americans but, even now, are still racially segregated

in many ways. The biography for the White American group is much different. White Americans

started out in England, then “discovered” America, then owned slaves, eventually lost the right to

own slaves, created manifest destiny, and finally developed the land into what is modern day

America. White American never had to fight for their right to vote or own property like that of the

African American community. Even now, the two biographies differ; segregation in the workplace,

and encounters with police officers are two prime examples that are seen every day.

Groups within a society can also have a shared biography. For example, African Americans

have a significantly different biography as a whole than White Americans. There are different

cultures and family habits between the two. The group biography of African Americans as a group

is generally something like: enslaved from Africa in 1619, then sent on a boat to America, then

served as slaves until 1865, then were free Americans but, even now, are still racially segregated

in many ways. The biography for the White American group is much different. White Americans

started out in England, then “discovered” America, then owned slaves, eventually lost the right to

own slaves, created manifest destiny, and finally developed the land into what is modern day

60
America. White American never had to fight for their right to vote or own property like that of the

African American community. Even now, the two biographies differ; segregation in the workplace,

and encounters with police officers are two prime examples that are seen every day.

A good example of how History, and Society directly affect an individual’s Biography, is

Tahlia’s story of growing up in Switzerland. When she was eleven years old, she and her family

moved to Switzerland, because her stepfather is Swiss and he got a job there. Tahlia was put into

a public school. In class, only German was spoken and Swiss-German on the street. Tahlia spoke

no German at all. It was difficult to keep up in class. However, she tried hard and, with the help of

her German tutor, she was able to thrive.

The historical Context of Tahlia’s story goes into Switzerland’s past. Switzerland is a

country that, during the 80s, 90s, and 2000s, had allowed thousands of immigrants from different

countries. Most of the immigrants came from Albania, Turkey, and Kosovo. One of the reasons

the Swiss let in so many immigrants, was because they needed workers to fulfill their low-pay job

positions. This is how Swiss society is set up: foreigners employ most lower-class jobs, while the

upper class jobs are occupied by the Swiss.

Because Tahlia looked and spoke like her Albanian and Turkish friends, she was placed

into a less performing school after sixth grade. All of the children who were from immigrant

backgrounds were put in the lower secondary schools, while the rest of their peers, the rich Swiss

people, were placed into higher achieving schools called Gymnasium. Gymnasiums are the schools

in Switzerland that lead to a University degree. In Switzerland, the only way to receive a Bachelor

of Arts degree is through Gymnasium. This starts at age twelve and is comparable to middle school

in the USA. This means that children are separated and divided into two sections at a young age

in Switzerland’s Society.

61
 At age twelve, the government already determined Tahlia’s future. She was not taken

seriously because of her economic rank, complexion, and accent. Luckily for her, at age seventeen,

she was able to move back to the USA. She lived with her grandparents and attended high school.

She is now attending college, which she views as a privilege. The setup of Swiss Society, with its

History of aversion to foreigners and wanting to keep them in lower-ranking jobs, directly affected

Tahlia’s life story, or Biography.

Life chances can be an important element of a person’s biography. A life chance is a term

that refers to, “opportunities people have to provide themselves with material goods, positive living

conditions, and favorable life experiences.” (Schaefer, 2009) Some people have better life chances

than others. For example, the ability to attend college is a life chance. It isn’t an opportunity that

comes to everyone, and it is something that can vastly improve a person’s ability to lay hold of

more opportunities later. As another example, when one has a low income, their education may

not be as good as others with a higher income, and may not be able to get a higher education. It

may also be harder to obtain a job that will provide a substantial income for your family. If one is

born into a wealthy family, they may have a better chance to obtain the education, and resources

to help better their life. Other examples of things that can influence a person’s life chances are

family wealth, health, location, or ethnic background. This concept connects with the Sociological

Imagination because it describes how the Life Chances of an individual may determine how their

life manifests in the future. When applying the Sociological Imagination to understand an

individual, or a group of people, it is important to examine their Life Chances, in order to better

comprehend why they are in the predicament in which they stand.

When examining the current scandalous situation in our country of white-police brutality

towards African-Americans, one might look into the history of white people dehumanizing, and

62
oppressing black people through slavery, Jim Crow Laws, segregation, and overall racism. The

relationship between cops and people of color, blacks in particular, is reflective of the past between

these two groups of humans. Thus, Life Chances of what race people are born into creates a

prominent role in deciding between life and death when faced with the authority of the police.

Black unarmed men are the most likely group to be killed by the police. The Sociological

Imagination would delve into the context of African-Americans’ disadvantage in this society, and

Caucasians’ privilege, in other words the Life Chances of these two groups of people when

attempting to understand racial profiling, and the killing of unarmed black people by the police.

Ariadenis came to America from Dominican Republic when she finished high school. This

has impacted her because she lives in a brand new country, which is not at all like her native home,

American culture, or language background. Having to leave home by herself and become an

independent woman made her realize that the most valuable and important things are hard to

accomplish. She came to this country to take advantage of the education knowing that is a lot better

here than in Dominican Republic. This event didn’t only change where she lived, but also who she

was and helped her appreciate what she had. Reflecting upon her good economic situation back in

my country, she sometimes came to some questions like, “Why I am doing this?” and “Do I really

have to go through all this?” Then the answer was, “Of course I have to because it's all for my

future”. Ariadenis’ life chances were better than other people’s who might be able to get an

education and her education will improve her life chances in the future.

Another example of life chances would be Kelly’s background. Growing up, Kelly lived

in abusive home. Her warped perception of how families worked bled into her perception of the

world around her. If Kelly had a job, the money went to her mom, and she wasn’t allowed to

maintain normal friendships with other kids at school. Deceit and theft became a very natural

63
course of action. By the time, she finally figured out that her family wasn’t normal; she was already

an adult and had never developed the skills that the other kids in her society had to go to college

or get a job. It wasn’t her fault that her parents had failed to teach her those important things, but

they were still her life chances. She was still a member of middle class America though, which as

a society provides better life chances than many people have, so with hard work and help, Kelly

was able to change her situation.

Those three components history, biography, and society, give us both an extensive

understanding of individuals and an understanding of how their experiences relate to a society’s

past and present. We need to develop an understanding and awareness of all three elements

together in order to develop sociological imagination.

Troubles & Issues

To fully use the sociological imagination, we also need to understand the difference

between personal struggles and widespread difficulties. These are referred to as trouble and issues,

respectively. Troubles can be defined as someone’s personal difficulties or individual struggles.

Troubles are a state of worry, distress, anxiety, need, affliction or something that prevents a person

from doing something. A person can struggle with anything from being able to afford groceries,

to health problems, to a car breaking down. In contrast, issues are not individual problems; they

are the collective problems. When many members of society struggle with the same things, it is

called ‘a societal issue’. If many people struggle to afford groceries, then it is probably due to

poverty or inflation. Unemployment would be a perfect example to use in trying to understand

how troubles transcend to issues. When one person in a population is unemployed, we view it as

a personal trouble. But when in a nation of about fifty million employees and up to fifteen million

64
are unemployed then it raises concerns and therefore becomes an issue because the same not so

satisfactory thing is equally happening to groups of people in a society at maybe or maybe not the

same time period. Troubles and issues are connected and demonstrate cause and effect

relationships.

For example, finishing high school for Tyashia was very different from most average

students. She didn’t finish high school by attending classes’ every day; instead, all of her classes

were listed online. The reason was that Tyashia struggled with Bipolar 2 Disorder and Major

Depression, so she wasn’t able to go to school. She needed to attend therapy during school hours,

since it wasn’t open on weekends. These are examples of troubles because she struggled with her

disorders and being out of school. In contrast, they are not examples of societal issues because the

broader population did not share her difficulties or circumstances.

Kelly, who was an example of life chances, also can help illustrate how troubles and issues

are related. Her lack of freedom, lack of sense of self, and lack of place of safety were examples

of troubles, as well as the dysfunction that came because of how she perceived the world. Her

troubles relate to the societal issue of abusive environments going on uninterrupted. Despite the

fact that her specific home environment and the type of abuse was rare, there is evidence that many

kinds of abusive environments occur undetected in a family setting until it’s too late to interfere.

Putting It All Together

The Sociological Imagination connects all of these concepts to help us understand the

world we live in. For example, applying the sociological imagination to Lana and her boyfriend

can help us to better understand the relationships between Context, Society, Biography, History,

Life Chances, Troubles and Issues.

65
 Lana and her boyfriend have a mutual appreciation for classic rock, so she wasn’t really

expecting such a defensive stance from him when she questioned rap music. He thought she was

pretty close-minded to not see the point in a form of music different from her preferred taste.

Growing up by the border of Canada where everybody from the lower to upper class had a very

similar taste in music, food, attire and hobbies, you could say the cultural diversity where Lana

was from was lacking. That is not to say there wasn’t any racial diversity, there was. However,

although there was racial diversity, there wasn’t any racial prejudice in general. She never had to

judge anyone through stereotypes, skin color or affiliation. If you had done right by her, you were

all right by her. It sounds peaceful, and it really was, but when everything is similar and everybody

likes each other, it can be hard to understand situations where everybody is different and that sole

fact can breed contempt.

The context of Lana’s boyfriend’s past was totally different. It consisted of poor

neighborhoods, gang violence, heavy racism, and what seemed like almost constant judgment of

people for how they looked. Although she already knew the History of his race and events that

have led to where Caucasian Americans and African Americans are now, Lana had never actively

applied it to herself. After meeting Lana, her boyfriend began to learn about and understand the

History of where she was born and raised; a rural, racially diverse, little to no violence, personally

driven community having no gangs to represent but only individuality, and being a part of Canada/

New France as well as America are important characteristics and pieces of History about the

Society where Lana is from.

Although Lana’s boyfriend isn’t a fan of rap, he understands and respects rappers and the

meaning behind the music. While Lana hears random words about cities, drugs, and gangs, he

hears behind their words preaching and expressions of the difficult existence of people coping and

66
growing up in a community that is dangerous and inopportune. He understands the context of

rappers. Through looking at her boyfriend’s personal collection of experiences as well as the

experience of his race and their ancestors, she gained a better understanding of his behavior and

actions when he was defensive about rap music. Lana applied all of the terms taught in this chapter

to better understand her boyfriend: Society, History, Biography, Life Chances, and Troubles and

Issues.

When Lana’s boyfriend did the same about her experiences, he was able to understand her

behaviors and actions when she questioned rap music in the first place. It doesn’t stop there:

stepping into each other’s shoes was constructive for their relationship, and allowed Lana to look

at the larger misunderstandings in Society between people and groups not only over rap, but over

race in general. Lana took a personal point of view and solution to a Trouble and used it to connect,

and come to her own opinions on an Issue of a Society as a whole.

Furthermore, while Lana learned more about her boyfriend, their relationship, connections

between their ancestors’ Biographies and Histories, and the scope of the problem in the larger

picture, she ultimately learned more about herself as a person. And that is how the Sociological

Imagination can work any day for any person doing something as simple as deciding on a radio

station. It is a multi-faceted way of seeing and understanding things from different perspectives

and connecting individual point of views and Troubles to the more grand scheme of things and the

more broad Issues of a Society, whilst orienting oneself within that Society.

Conclusion

The sociological imagination is one of humanity’s tools for reflection. It allows us to look

at the relationship between our individual experiences and the positions we occupy in society

67
(Mills 1959). The sociological imagination is extremely important in everyday life. In order to

understand why people act the way they act and think the way they think, one needs to look into

their background, their history, their biography, what troubles they are facing, and what issues

exist within their society. Most importantly, context, otherwise known as “the stuff around stuff,”

allows you to see where you exist within your society. Developing a strong sociological

imagination will enable us to understand and help people.

68
 REFERENCES
Abercrombie, Nicholas, Stephen Hill, and Bryan Turner. 2006. The Penguin Dictionary of
Sociology (5th ed). London: Penguin.

Carroll, Susan J. “Women in State government: Historical Patterns and Future Prospects.” csg.org.
The Council of State Governments, 2013. Web. 07 Dec. 2015.

Carson, E. Ann. “Prisoners in 2014.” Bureau of Justice Statistics. United States’ Department of
Justice, Sept. 2015. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.

“Current Governors.” National Governor’s Association. National Governor’s Association, n.d.

Web. 07 Dec. 2015.

“Current Numbers.” Center for American Women and Politics. Rutgers University, n.d. Web. 07
Dec. 2015.

“Definition of Terms: Sex, Gender, Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation.” American

Psychological Association. American Psychological Association, 18-20 Feb. 2011. Web.
03 Dec. 2015.

“Drug Law Convictions and Punishments.” Drug Policy Alliance. Drug Policy Alliance, n.d. Web.
15 Dec. 2015.

“Education and Socioeconomic Status.” American Psychological Association. American

Psychological Association, n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

“Fair Sentencing Act.” American Civil Liberties Union. American Civil Liberties Union, n.d. Web.
15 Dec. 2015.

Fry, Richard and Rakesh Kochhar. “America’s wealth gap between middle-income and upper-
income families is widest on record.” pewresearch.org. Pew Research Center, 17 Dec.
2014. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.

Henslin, James. 2011. Essentials of Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach (9th edition).

Boston, MA: Pearson Higher Education.

Kindy, Kimberley. “Fatal police shootings in 2015 approaching 400 nationwide.” Washington
Post. The Washington Post, 30 May 2015. Web. 16 Dec. 2015.

Lauzen, Martha M. “Boxed In: Portrayals of Female Characters and Employment of Behind-the-
Scenes Women in 2014-15 Prime-time Television.” sdsu.edu. San Diego State University,
2015. Web. 09 Dec. 2015.

69
Lauzen, Martha M. “Independent Women.” sdsu.edu. San Diego State University, 2015. Web. 09
Dec. 2015.

Lauzen, Martha M. “It’s a Man’s (Celluloid) World: On-Screen Representations of Female

Characters in the Top 100 Films of 2014.” sdsu.edu. San Diego State University, 2015.
Web. 09 Dec. 2015.

Lauzen, Martha M. “Women and the Big Picture.” sdsu.edu. San Diego State University, 2015.
Web. 09 Dec. 2015.

Manning, Jennifer E. “Membership of the 114th Congress: A Profile.” fas.org. Federation of

American Scientists, 31 Oct. 2015. Web. 07 Dec. 2015.

Mills, C. Wright. 1959. “Chapter One: The Promise.” The Sociological Imagination.
http://legacy.lclark.edu/~goldman/socimagination.html

Miss Representation. Dir. Jennifer Siebel Newsom and Kimberlee Acquaro. Virgil Films &
Entertainment and Roco Films, 2011. Web.

NPR Staff. “100 Years Later, What's The Legacy Of 'Birth Of A Nation'?” npr.org. National Public
Radio, 01 May 2015. Web. 14 Dec. 2015

“Race and the Drug War.” Drug Policy Alliance. Drug Policy Alliance, n.d. Web. 15 Dec. 2015.

Students. Sociology 411. Dryden: n.p., 2015. PDF File.

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. “Results from the 2013 National
Survey on Drug Use and Health: Summary of National Findings.” United States’
Department of Health and Human Services, Sept. 2014. Web. 15 Dec. 2015

“The American Middle Class is Losing Ground.” Pew Research Center. Pew Research Center, 09
Dec. 2015. Web. 11 Dec. 2015.

The House I Live In. Dir. Eugene Jarecki. SnagFilms, 2012. Web.

“The Simple Truth About the Gender Pay Gap (Fall 2015).” American Association of University
Women. American Association of University Women, 2015. Web. 10 Dec. 2015.

“Thirty Years of America’s Drug War: A Chronology.” Public Broadcasting Service. WGBH
Educational Foundation, n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

United States’ Census Bureau. QuickFacts. United States’ Department of Commerce, n.d. Web.
15 Dec. 2015.

United States Sentencing Commission. Report on Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy Chapter
1. n.d. United States Sentencing Commission. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

70
Witt, Jon. 2007. The Big Picture: A Sociological Primer. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

“Work, Stress and Health & Socioeconomic Status.” American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association, n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2015.

71