 Concepts – equality, inequality, hierarchy, exclusion, poverty

and deprivation
 Theories of social stratification – Structural functionalist
theory, Marxist theory, Weberian theory
 Dimensions – class, status groups, ethnicity and race
 Social mobility – open and closed system, types of mobility
 Natural ( sex, race, geography)
SOCIETY Differences
Man-made (power, status, wealth)
values
Superior/ Inferior
Evaluate
Desirable/undesirable
Social Differences

Social Inequality

Hierarchy SOCIAL STRATIFICATION

 Social stratification process in which social inequalities exist in form of
structural hierarchical strata one placed above the other

 Sutherland and Maxwell  ‘a process of differentiation which places some

people higher than the others’.

 Stratification is viewed as a social process  it has 4 sub processes –

1. Differentiation
2. Evaluation
3. Ranking
4. Rewarding
 Strata are either closed or open

 T B Bottomore  Social stratification is traditionally classified into four forms

1. Slavery
2. Estate system
3. Caste
4. Classes
CONCEPT OF EQUALITY
 SS  “social equality” and “social inequality”

 J.J. Rousseau  “men are born free and equal but everywhere they are in
chains”

 Equality / Social Equality  condition in which members of a group or society

have equal access to, wealth, prestige, or power.
 Since French Revolution + growth of liberal democracies  equality has
usually been interpreted mostly as political equality

equality means equality between individuals as citizens

constitutional rights  fundamental Rights, the right to hold political office,

the right to exercise all civic rights

 Social Equality  Emphasizes Fair Distribution of Income and Wealth

Egalitarian Objectives of welfare programmes

PETER SAUNDERS ON EQUALITY
1. Formal or Legal Equality  present de-facto in modern society
2. Equality of Opportunity  It is a symbol of merit based society
3. Equality of Outcome  t is a symbol of an egalitarian society, which
provides for equality in terms of outcome as well, irrespective of the
efforts put by the members
SOCIAL INEQUALITY
 Inequality is found in all societies irrespective of time or place

 social inequality refers to the socially created inequalities

 There are also patterns of inequality associated with the social positions people
occupy

 presence of social groups which are ranked one above the other in terms of the
power, prestige and wealth their members possess.

 Members in stratum will have some awareness of common interest and common
identity

 They will share a similar life-style which will distinguish them from the members of
other social strata
There are two types of inequality:
1. Natural
2. Man Made

PLATO
 First to acknowledge that inequality is inevitable
 suggest ways in which the distribution of money, status and power could be
altered for the betterment of both the individual and the society
Three classes:
1. Ruling
2. Non-ruling
3. Auxiliaries or the workers.
ARISTOTLE
 concerned with the consequences of inequality in birth, strength and wealth
 Three classes-
1. Very Rich,
2. Very Poor, and
3. Moderate

MACHIAVELLI
 He saw tension between elite and the masses.
 He asked “who is fit to rule and what form of rule will produce order,
happiness, prosperity and strength”

He preferred democratic rule.

THOMAS HOBBES
 All men equally interested in acquiring power and privileges, which leads to
chaotic conditions

unless there is a set of rules by which they agree to abide

rules constitute “Social Contract”

people give the right to one man to rule, who has collective desire and will.

sovereign can be removed if he fails to come up to the maintenance of equality

for safety of all men.
MAX WEBER
 Existence of three types of groups based on different forms of inequality and
they may be independent of one another
 Three types of inequalities are:
1. Market / economic inequality
2. Social honor or prestige
3. Political power

PIERRE BOURDIEU
 Argues that social resources can be divided into four forms of capital
1. Economic capital in the form of material assets and income.
2. Cultural capital such as educational qualifications and status.
3. Social capital in the form of networks of contacts and social associations.
4. Symbolic capital like social status and good reputation.

MARXISTS
 Attribute inequalities in societies to the unequal access to the forces of
production
 Opportunities and resources are monopolized by a few at the expense of the
others, which lead to inequalities in societies.
HARALAMBOS AND HOLBORN
 Have clubbed of inequalities in two broad types of inequalities
1. inequality of power
2. inequality all types of material well –being
 These inequalities become repressive when they are rigidly enforced
 Ex: Caste, slavery, bondage.
 Inequalities exist at micro level as well as at macro level

 Globally, nations are also divided as first world countries and the third world
countries
FUNCTIONALISTS
 Argue that inequalities in society are inevitable as they ensure that all kinds
of jobs get done in the society.
 Inequalities are a result of unequal capabilities of individuals and they get
unequal rewards for that.

WILKINSON AND PICKETT

 Inequality in society is not only harmful for the individual, but is also
dysfunctional for the society as a whole.

 Ex: unequal societies have higher level of mistrust and as a result,

cooperation and harmony in the society takes a hit.
GORAN THERBORN
 Inequalities are produced and sustained socially by systemic arrangements,
processes and distributive actions, individual as well as collective

 Therborn has delved consequences of inequalities

 premature death, ill health, humiliation, loss of human rights, exclusion from
mainstream social life, powerlessness and even dehumanization

 To deal with these consequences, he suggests that exclusion of the poor from
everyday life and seclusion of the elite from the public has to be countered
somehow.
SOME SALIENT ASPECTS OF SOCIAL INEQUALITY

 Social inequality is the result of differentiation

 Social inequality is universal

 Social inequality is normally built into the social structure

 Social inequality is a source of social conflict and social change

 Social inequalities are normally sustained by the power of ideas

 Social inequalities are not necessarily based on natural or biological

inequalities
CONCEPT OF HIERARCHY
 “hierarchy”  gradation or a ranking system

individuals and groups in any society are not socially treated equally but graded
differently

 Hierarchy  “ranking of statuses within society or an organization according

to some criterion of evaluation accepted as relevant within the system”

Inequalities stratification hierarchy

denotes presence of multiple strata in a society placed one above the other
 Hierarchies can be present in many forms – caste hierarchy, class hierarchy,
gender hierarchy, political hierarchy etc

 Functionalists  hierarchy is also a symbol of rising specialization and

differentiation in society.

 Post modernists  western societies now have a continuum of individualized

inequalities and hence almost infinite strata and numerous hierarchies

 Modern democratic societies  provide for equality of opportunity and abhor

hierarchy based on status

 facilitated equality in political sphere, inequalities in social and economic sphere

still exist
 today one is part of multiple hierarchies at the same time.

There is a different hierarchy at workplace and a different at home

 Marxists  perceive this hierarchy as a design of the dominant classes and deem
it inimical to classless society

hierarchy promotes conflict as well

 Hierarchy is viewed in value-neutral terms too

 In organizations  hierarchy provides direction to the collective efforts and

ensures that orders are executed.
POVERTY
 Poverty  is a social problem  lack of material resources which one requires
for a minimum standard of life

 Poverty  interrelated wave of economic, social, psychological, cultural and

political factors which influence the occurrence and persistence of poverty.

“REAL POVERTY MAY NOT BE APPARENT AND APPARENT POVERTY MAY NOT BE
REAL”

 Poverty  pronounced as deprivation in well being and comprises many

dimensions.

low income, inability to acquire basic goods and services required for survival
with dignity.
 There are two broad views on poverty

SOCIOLOGIST
looks at it as a multidimensional
concept and views poverty within the
framework of social problems and
concerns himself with the causes and
effects of poverty.
ECONOMIST
identifies the lack of economic
resources as causing hardship to a
person.

Poverty can be looked from various other perspectives

ABSOLUTE POVERTY RELATIVE POVERTY

MAJOR THEORIES OF POVERTY –

1. ‘BLAME THE POOR’ VIEW AND ‘BLAME THE SYSTEM’ VIEW

2. THE CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE - Oscar Lewis

3. THE SITUATIONAL PERSPECTIVE

4. POVERTY AS A POSITIVE FEEDBACK SYSTEM OR VICIOUS CIRCLE

5. STRATIFICATION THEORIES - Herbert Gans in his ‘More Equality, 1973’

6. DIALECTICAL APPROACH
7. POVERTY AND POWER THESIS – Ralph Miliband in ‘Politics and Poverty,
1974’

8. DEPENDENCY THEORY – Andre Gunder Frank, Wallerstein – WORLD

SYSTEM THEORY

9. FEMINIST VIEW
Ruth Lister  “FEMINIZATION OF POVERTY”
Ruspini in his ‘Longitudinal Research in Social Sciences, 2000’
‘HIDDEN POVERTY’

10. LACK OF DEVELOPMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURES - Gunnar Myrdal

11. INDIAN POVERTY - Surya Narain, in his ‘A Handbook of Poverty in India’

EXCLUSION
It is a process by which individuals or households experience multiple deprivations

either of resources or of social links to the wider community or society

which prevents them from participating fully in the economic, social and political
life of the society in which they are around

Differential treatment, unequal opportunities and marginalization are tools of

social exclusion

Social exclusion is not accidental but systematic  it is the result of structural

features of society.
 MICHAEL HARALAMBOS  situation in which multiple deprivations prevent
individuals from participating in important areas of social activities.

 RUTH LISTER : “POVERTY, 2004”  which individuals may cut off from full
involvement in the wider society or prevention of individuals or groups from
having the same opportunities that are available to the majority of the
population

 MARY DALY  concept is wider than poverty as it talks about not only
resource availability, but also about participation in various social processes.
 Social exclusion is involuntary – that is, exclusion is practiced regardless of the
wishes of those who are excluded.

 ANTHONY GIDDENS  Homelessness is one of the worst forms of social exclusions

it automatically excludes an individual from various other services

 ELLIOTT CURRIE  Social exclusion leads to other abnormal behaviors

Currie in her studies found that exclusion also leads to delinquent behavior

South Africa Apartheid is one of the most telling examples of social

India  Dalits or the ex-untouchable castes, tribals, women and the differently-
abled are worst sufferers of exclusion.
 Prolonged experience of discriminatory or insulting behavior often produces a
reaction on the part of the excluded who then stop trying for inclusion.

Dalits building their own temple, or convert to another religion after prolonged
exclusion by Upper caste Hindus

 When legislations are enacted to curb exclusions, prejudices are practiced at more
subtle and latent level.

legislation alone is unable to transform society or produce lasting social change.

constant social campaign to change awareness and sensitivity is required to break

them.
 social exclusion is not a phenomenon prevalent among under-privileged only

It is practiced among affluent as well

Exclusive clubs, gated communities , ‘Religious and social out-casting’

phenomenon prevalent in India which

applies to affluent class also when they
violate norms of the groups.

People may also exclude themselves in other situations

delinquency, drug addiction, school dropout, anomie, escapist mentality

 Exclusion is not Always Deprivation and Inclusion is not Always Justice

There are situations in which even inclusion would lead to painful experiences

Women working in company which is dominated by men who are not that co-
operative

MULTIPLE DIMENSIONS OF EXCLUSION–

1. Exclusion of social rights and barriers thereof which prevent access to these rights.

2. Resource or economic exclusion as in case of poverty

3. Labor market exclusions as in case of unemployment and underemployment

4. Service exclusion as in case of caste system, racial segregation

5. Exclusion from social relations like family friends etc which happens when people
are away or forbidden to make such contacts

6. Exclusion in another sense means isolation from larger society itself and deals
with issues like anomie and social integration.

7. Exclusion as extreme marginalization as in case of multi cultural societies.

DEPRIVATION
 It refers to denial of access to resources required for self-development and fulfill of
basic necessities.

 Resources can be social, economic and cultural and basic necessities vary from one
culture to another.

 Deprivation is ‘of’ resources || Exclusion is ‘from’ social participation.

 PIERRE BOURDIEU  it is lack of adequate social, cultural, symbolic and economic

capital.

 One may face deprivation despite relatively good economic condition.

 cultural norms can lead to derivations.

Deprivation can also be due to structural factors
India  rigid social stratification like caste which led to multiple deprivations for
those in lower strata

South Arica  racism and ethnocentric practices deprived one section of

population from amenities of life

situation when one doesn’t have even basic

ABSOLUTE DEPRIVATION necessities of life like – food, sanitation,
drinking water, basic education, health
Extreme poverty,
marginalization and
huger are examples of
absolute deprivation.
 RELATIVE DEPRIVATION Actual or perceived lack of
resources required to maintain the
quality of life ( diet, activities,
Despite absolute progress in material possessions)
society, due to presence of
inequalities, relative
deprivation always remains
there.

Marxists  attribute deprivation to unequal nature of society which is marked by

unequal control over forces of productions.
THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION – STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALIST VIEW
 SS exists because it serves important role in functioning of society.

 Different strata are created due to differential capacity of actors and their ability to
perform different roles.

 Functionalists see existence of various strata in terms of their interdependence,

cooperation and serving the function of integration of society.
PARSONS VIEW
 Every society is based upon consensus in terms of norms and values.

conformity to these norms is considered desirable and is often rewarded.

Differential conformity and differential rewards form strata in society.

Those who perform in greater conformity to these norms get bigger rewards and are
ranked higher

 Society has certain functional pre-requisites which need to be fulfilled

SS helps in fulfillment of these functional prerequisites.

 Stratification is inevitable as value-consensus is an integral part of societies

 Acknowledges that there is inequality in society

this is deemed as legitimate as per values and norms as a measure of differential

achievement.

Critics  which values are more important is not clear

Parson  argues that it vary from society to society

Ex: Traditional society religious values may be more important

American society  Materialistic values
Indian society  Cultural & Spiritual values
W L WARNER VIEW
 ‘The Social Life of a Modern Community, 1941’  Emphasizes on ‘social status’
instead of economic class in SS

He considers three variables as determinants of status

EDUCATION OCCUPATION INCOME

Other criteria which determine status

MEMBERSHIP OF LEISURE
FRIENDSHIP VOLUNTARY ACTIVITIES
GROUPS
 DAVIS AND MOORE VIEW
‘Some Principle of Social Stratification, 1945’

There is no society which is not stratified

strata exist on the basis of differential rewards

Such rewards are attached to the positions that exist in the various strata

some of these positions are functionally more important and others are functionally
less important.
 Societies need these stratified positions for its proper functioning

Higher rewards are attached to functionally more important positions in order to

attract talented people needed to hold such positions

Talent is considered scarce and more talented people are required to hold more
functionally important positions

Important positions also require greater investment of time, skill-sets and training

Hence such positions need to be compensated accordingly

SS is mechanism of role allocation in which more important positions are filled by

more talented people for the benefit of all.
 MELVIN TUMIN VIEW
SS  arrangement of any social group or society into a ‘hierarchy of positions’ that
are unequal with regard to power, property, social evaluation and psychic
gratification.

He challenged the claim of Davis and Moore

it is not possible to determine the relative functional importance of various social

positions in an objective manner

talent and ability can also not be measured.

there is no equal opportunity and trainees don’t make any significant sacrifices.

He also contends that rewards are not the only motivational force to motivate
individuals
He felt that far from being functional, stratification systems are dysfunctional
1. stratification limits the opportunities of the under-privileged or subordinate
groups in society

2. stratification often acts as a barrier to motivation and not a promoter of it

privileged class is able to
impose upon society the idea
3. stratification helps to maintain the status quo
that the existing inequalities
are natural, logical and morally
right.
4. stratification systems distribute rewards unjustly, they encourage the less
privileged to become hostile, suspicious and distrustful
This results in social unrest
and chaos threatening
integration of society
 Davis and Moore on Tumin

functional importance of a position can be judged by the uniqueness of such

positions and degree to which other positions depend on the particular
position.

Differential rewards are necessary as loss of trainees is not only in terms of

money, but also in terms of time and energy.

Stratification may be dysfunctional in some instances, but its very existence in

society proves its functional nature
Criticisms of structure functional theories of stratification are –

1. Ralf Dahrendorf  observes that stratification originates from the ‘closely

related trinity of norms, sanction and power’

2. Rigidity of caste system cannot be explained through functional theories of

Davis and Moore and others.

3. ‘Elite recruitment’ theory proves that elite gobble up all the rewards and
perpetuate elite rule.

4. Beck and Baudrillard  visualize that such functional stratification is no

longer valid as inequalities are now individualized and no clear strata exist
today.
 Alvin Gouldner  stratification is not inevitable as Davis and Moore predicted and
criticizes them for providing a justification for social inequalities.

 Jonathan Turner  structure functionalist theories suffer from illegitimate

teleologies as a big logical problem. They often take cause and effect and vice-
versa.
THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION – MARXIAN VIEW
 His conception of strata is based in material factors

central notion of dialectical materialism, unequal control over forces of

production and consequent class formation

 In every MOP  a minority gains control over FOP

society gets divided into two broad strata

have nots or the the haves or the

subject class ruling class
 Power of ruling class is driven from its ownership of the FOP and it exploits
the subject class.

 Only when the FOP are communally owned will classes will disappear

thereby bringing an end to the exploitation and oppression of some by the

others

 Marxian  strata are defined as ‘classes’

‘a social group whose members share the same relations to the forces of
production’

Relationship between the classes is that of mutual dependence and conflict

 Marx also talks of other intermediary strata like – petite bourgeoisie, lumpen
proletariat..

they ultimately constitute two broad strata only

PROLETARIZATION BOURGEOISIZATION

 Marx  optimistic view about social stratification

class struggle leading a revolution that will ultimately lead to class equality in
society
THEORIES OF STRATIFICATION – WEBER’S TRINITARIAN VIEW
 Weber  refused to reduce stratification to economic factors (class) but saw it as
multidimensional

Economics Prestige/Status Power

ECONOMICS

 Group of people in the same economic or market situation

 economic condition of one affects one’s chances of obtaining those material things which
are deemed as desirable in their society
 ‘life chances’  rewards and advantages afforded by market capacity to differentiate
different classes

Those who share similar ‘life chances’, share similar class.

 On the basis of life chances, Weber see different classes like –
1. propertied upper class
2. property-less white collar workers
3. petty bourgeoisie and
4. manual working class

PRESTIGE/STATUS

 Status refers to unequal distribution of social honor

 Status  ‘effective claim to social esteem’
 honor may be any quality that is shared by the people and held in esteem
 Income, family background, education and all those criteria that are valued  identified as
markers of status.
 Status relates to consumption of goods produced ; class relates to economic production

Class and status may overlap, but not necessarily

Unlike classes, members of status groups are almost always aware of their common status
situation.
 Weber  status groups reach their most developed form in caste system

POWER/ PARTY

 classes exist in the economic order and status groups in the social order, parties can be
found in the political order

 parties ‘are always structures struggling for domination’

 people who constitute a party are those who have a goal towards which they strive
collectively and in a planned manner

Goal of Party goal may be ‘personal’

e.g. honor for the leader or followers
party may seek to realize of the party.
a program for ideal or
material purposes

 Parties usually, but not always, represent class or status groups.

 Parties may pursue interests that are determined through class situation or through status
situation

 He identifies two types of parties – parties of patronage and parties of principle.

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF CLASS
 Class  social group having identical skills, incomes, wealth and material well being in
general.

 MARX popularized concept of Class in sociology

he perceived it as a social group which has similar position in MOP & FOP in terms of their
ownership and roles

Marx  Following characteristics –

1. Class stratification is fluid and open. There are no legal or traditional sanctions on
mobility between different strata.
2. Class positions in some part achieved and not ascribed.
3. Class has an economic basis.
 WEBER  ‘A body of people having identical position in a market situation’.
 He broadly defines class structure in terms of 4 classes –
1. Propertied upper class
2. White collar workers
3. Petty bourgeoisie
4. Manual labourers.

 He rejected Marxist idea that different classes tend to polarize toward two dichotomous
classes.

According to him inequalities are highly dynamic

‘class’, ‘status’ and ‘power’ dimensions to inequalities.

 BOTTOMORE  differentiates four types of classes –
1. upper class
2. middle class
3. working class and
4. Peasantry

 GIDDENS there are three main sources of class power –

1. the possession of property dominant/upper class based on property
2. Qualifications intermediate/middle class based on credentials
3. physical labor power working/lower class based on labor power

 POST MODERNISTS  class stratification is no longer segmentary, but is along a

continuum of individualized inequalities as a result of almost infinite division of labor, skill
sets, consumption patterns
 GOLDTHORPE  empirical study of Europe indicates

“long range mobility is difficult”

even European countries, mobility is limited to only among immediate classes and mobility
from a class significantly distanced in hierarchy from another is lower

 RALF DAHRENDORF  class stratification is not in so much antagonistic terms as Marx has
visualized

New techniques and methods of directing the class struggle have been developed both in
industrial and political sphere.
 OGBURN AND NIMKOFF

social class is the aggregate of persons having essentially the same social status in a given
society

 PAKULSKI AND WATERS  ‘Death of Class, 1996’

status dimension is becoming more important in post-industrial societies

Consumption is now based on status and not on basis of occupation or economic well being

Rising consumerism has promoted status and eclipsed class.

 PIERRE BOURDIEU  ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, 1992’

lifestyle choices, rather than class, are more important today

Individual identities are now more shaped by lifestyle choices rather than by more
traditional indicators like occupation.
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF STATUS GROUPS
 status  is social grouping based on prestige, goodwill, fame, personal qualities and social
capital of an individual.

 Status is often seen in terms of the social position.

 Earlier  status was seen as in terms of ascriptive values – e.g. – Caste, Nobleman, Clergy,
Estate owner
ASCRIPTIVE
 Today  term status is wider
ACHIEVED

 Modern society  New occupations and new opportunities for mobility lead to opening of
strata
 WEBER  Status is associated with consumption and not production

caste is the most developed form of status based stratification

 W L WARNER  ‘The Social Life of a Modern Community, 1941’

emphasizes on ‘social status’ instead of economic class.

 PAKULSKI AND WATERS  ‘Death of Class, 1996’

 PIERRE BOURDIEU  ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, 1992’

SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF GENDER
 In almost all societies  gender is a significant form of social stratification.

 Gender is a critical factor in structuring the types of opportunities and life chances faced by
individuals and groups, and strongly influences the roles they play within social institutions
from the household to the state

 roles of men and women vary from culture to culture

there is no known instance of a society in which females are more powerful than males

women  primary responsibility for child care and domestic work

men  traditionally borne responsibility for providing the family livelihood.
 prevailing division of labour between the sexes has led to men and women assuming
unequal positions in terms of power, prestige and wealth

FUNCTIONALIST APPROACHES
 Society  system of interlinked parts which operate smoothly to produces social solidarity

show that gender differences contribute to social stability and integration

DOL between men and women is biologically based.

 GEORGE MURDOCK it as both practical and convenient that women should concentrate
on domestic and family responsibilities while men work outside the home

sexual DOL is present in all cultures  220 society

 TALCOTT PARSONS

family operates most efficiently with a clear-cut sexual division of labour

females  act in expressive roles, providing care and security to children and offering them
emotional support

Men  should perform instrumental roles namely, being the breadwinner in the family

women’s expressive and nurturing tendencies should also be used to stabilize and comfort
men.
 JOHN BOWLBY

If the mother is absent or if a child is separated from the mother at a young age

a state referred to as Maternal Deprivation

the child runs a high risk of being inadequately socialized

lead to serious social and psychological difficulties later in life, including antisocial and
psychopathic tendencies

child’s well-being and mental health can be best guaranteed through a close, personal and
continuous relationship with its mother
SOCIALIST AND MARXIST FEMINISM VIEW
 ENGELS  under capitalism, material and economic factors underlay women’s
subservience to men
because patriarchy has its roots in private property

1. capitalism intensifies patriarchy men’s domination over women by concentrating wealth

and power in the hands of a small number of men

2. for the capitalist economy to succeed, it must define people- in particular women- as
consumers, persuading them that their needs will only be met through ever- increasing
consumption of goods and products

3. capitalism relies on women to labour for free in the home, caring and cleaning
 SOCIALIST FEMINIST

reformist goals of liberal feminism are inadequate.

They have called for the restructuring of the family, the end of domestic slavery and the
introduction of some collective means of carrying out child-rearing, caring and household
maintenance

these ends would be achieved through a socialist revolution, which would produce true
equality
RADICAL FEMINISM
 Belief  men are responsible for and benefit from the exploitation of women

 Patriarchy is viewed as a universal phenomenon that has existed across time and cultures

 Radical feminists often concentrate on the family as one of the primary sources of women’s
oppression in society

They argue that men exploit women by relying on the free domestic labour that women
provide in the home

 Male violence against women as central to male supremacy

 domestic violence, rape and sexual harassment are all part of the systematic oppression of
women, rather than isolated cases
 conceptions of beauty and sexuality are imposed by men on women in order to produce
a certain type of femineity

 emphasize a slim body and a caring, nurturing attitude towards men help to perpetuate
women’s subordination

 ‘objectification’ of women through the media, fashion and advertising turns women into
sexual objects whose main role is to please and entertain men.
 S. FIRESTONE  men control women’s roles in reproduction and child- rearing

Women dependent materially on men for protection and livelihood of child

 ‘biological inequality is socially organized in the nuclear family.

‘SEX CLASS’  describe women’s social position

women can be emancipated only through the abolition of the family and the power relations
which characterize it
BLACK FEMINISM
 ethnic divisions among women are not considered by the main feminist schools of thought

oriented to the dilemmas of white, predominantly middle- class women living in

industrialized societies

‘unified form of gender oppression that is experienced equally by all women’ is problematic

emphasize the influence of the powerful legacy of slavery, segregation and the civil rights
movement on gender inequalities in the black community

the oppression of black women may be different as compared with that of white women
POSTMODERN FEMINISM
 challenges the idea that there is a unitary basis of identity and experience shared by all
women

 reject the claim that there is a grand theory that can explain the position of women in
society

 there are many individuals and groups, all of whom have very different experiences
(heterosexuals, lesbians, black women, working-class women, etc )

 otherness of different groups and individuals is celebrated in all its diverse forms.

 Emphasis on the positive side of otherness is a major theme in postmodern feminism, and
symbolizes plurality, diversity, difference and openness
 stressed the importance of ‘Deconstruction’

deconstruct male language and a masculine view of the world

In its place postmodern feminists have attempted to create fluid, open terms and language
which more closely reflect women’s experiences.
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF RACE
 Race  biological concept  category of people who share certain inherited physical
characteristics – color of skin, type of hair, facial features, size of head etc.

 first began  Europeans came into contact with other cultures and they collectively named
them as ‘non-white’ race

 Sociologists  race is a group of people who are perceived by a given society as biologically
or culturally different from the others

 view race as merely an ideological construct based on physical difference

 It is used as a tool of domination and spreading inequality as well in form of racial

stratification.
 JOSEPH ARTHUR DE GOBINEAU (19th cent)  gave first major racial classification in terms
of three distinct groups –
1. White (Caucasian)
2. Black (Negroid)
3. Yellow (Mongolian)

 He attached notions of superiority and inferiority with these races

White race was termed as supreme race

Such ideas of scientific racism also influenced colonial ruler and they at times tried to justify
their colonial sojourns on the basis of such ideas
 Rudyard Kipling  White Man’s Burden

 Adolf Hitler  adopted supremacy of Aryan race into a political ideology which led to
annihilation of millions of Jews

Racial discrimination –
 Apartheid in South Africa
 Criminal Tribes Act in India
 ‘Racial profiling’ in USA

 civil rights in USA in 1960s

 abolition of Apartheid in South Africa
racism now operates
NEW RACISM
in more subtle ways
in early 1990s
Theories explaining racial stratification –
 Differences were already there since centuries

but they acquired racist shape with arrival of racial nomenclature and terminologies which
coloured those physical differences as racial differences

White race supremacy is result of one such early theory

 Ethnocentrism It creates notions of ‘in-groups’ and ‘out-groups’

Use of exclusionary devices like ghettos, intermarriage restrictions and social distance
maintenance gives a practical shape to ethnocentrism
 conflict perspective  O C Cox :‘Class, Caste and Race, 1959’

racial stratification is seen as a product of the capitalist system in which ruling class used
slavery, colonization and racism as tools of exploiting labor

 racism is a result of highly unequal and exploitative relation that whites established with
non-whites

Slave trade was a consequence of this approach

Whites used racism as a tool to justify colonialism and decline of political rights like
citizenship to non-whites in their colonies further strengthened racial stratification
SOCIAL STRATIFICATION OF ETHNICITY
 ‘race’  biological ‘ethnicity’  cultural or social

 Ethnic group  may have a common language, history, national origin or lifestyle

 While racial identities remain same, ethnic identities are revised over time.

 One ethnic group may be subsumed by other under different situations

India itself has hundreds of ethnic groups, when Indians move to West all such groups are
subsumed into one tag of ‘Ethnic Indians’
Ethnic stratification depends upon the processes under which a society has undergone

PLURALISTIC CO- ANTAGONISTIC

ASSIMILATION MELTING POT
EXISTENCE CO-EXISTENCE

Such type of societies

best demonstrate
new immigrant different ethnic Society where existence of sharp
groups adopt the groups merge multiple ethnic ethnic lines leading to
attitudes and together. group co-exists Ethnic conflicts where
culture of the Ex: USA where in the same one ethnic group will
existing dominant many ethnic suffer at the cost of
society.
other
group identities have Ex: India Ex: Srilanka - ethnic
merged to a Tamils and Singhalese
great extent exist in form of distinct
strata
MAX WEBER: CONSTRUCTION OF ETHNICITY
 Ethnic group  “a group whose members share a belief that they have a common ancestor
or common descent”

 ethnic membership facilitates group formation of any kind, particularly in the political
sphere

 biology had little role to play in cultivating ‘sense of belonging’

 Weber also perceived Ethnic group as status group.

status group may be rooted in perceptions of shared religion, language of culture.

Members of the group on the basis of shared community tend to form ‘monopolistic social
closure’ – that is they refuse to let others enter their exclusive domain
 Every member of the group knows what is expected of him in “situations of collective
participation”.

They also function together to protect each other’s honour and dignity

It is on these perceptions that ‘suicide squads’ operate in political struggles

close relative “nation”

SOCIO-BIOLOGICAL OR PRIMORDIALIST APPROACH
 “biology as the fundamental for establishing ethnic identity”

The biological roots are determined by genetic and geographical factors.

These linkages result in the formation of close knit kin- groups.

Kinship loyalties demand that ‘near relatives are favored by those in situations of command
and controlling resources’

NEPOTISM is defined as the ‘tendency to favour kin over non-kin’.

This principle of kin-selection based on conception of socio-biology is not acceptable in

societies that claim to be democratic and follow principles of meritocracy
 Shaw and Wong ‘recognition of group affiliation is genetically encoded, being a product
of early human evolution, when the ability to recognize the member of one’s family group
was necessary for survival

 Primordialist concludes that “kinship bonds and cultural attachments” would always reign
supreme and govern social and political actions.
INSTRUMENTALIST APPROACH
 Instrumentalist  understands ethnicity as a device used by individuals and groups to
unify, organize, and mobilize populations to achieve larger goals.

goals are mostly of a political nature

 FREDRIK BARTH AND PAUL BRASS popularised it

Ethnicity: ‘As a product of political myths created and manipulated by cultural elites in their
pursuit or advantages and power

people can change membership and move from one ethnic group to another

change can take place either “because of circumstances or because of manipulation by

Political elites”
 The cultural norms, values and practices” of ethnic groups become resources for elites in
competition for political power and economic advantage.

They become symbols and reference for the identification of members of group, which are
called up in order to ease the creation of political identity

 WALLMAN  “Ethnicity is the process by which ‘their’ difference is used to enhance the
sense of ‘us’ for purposes of oganisation or identification”

Ethnicity can only happen at the boundary of ‘us’, in contact or confrontation or by contrast
with ‘them’

As the sense of ‘us’ changes, so the boundary between ‘us’ and ‘them’ shifts
SOCIAL MOBILITY
 Social mobility means transition of individuals or groups from one position in the social
hierarchy to another

from one stratum to another

As hierarchical patterns evolve in a society, a tendency of shifting these patterns at individual

and structural level also evolves.

Mobility, thus, can be at an individual level or at collective level which is termed as structural
mobility
 PARSONS  believed that mobility is a result of process of differentiation in society and
role filling by those who suit them most

 MARX believed that high rate of social mobility, embourgeoisement, will weaken class
solidarity

He foresees downward mobility in capitalism when Petite Bourgeoisie will sink down into
proletariat class

 FRANK PARKIN AND DAHRENDORF  believe that social mobility also acts as a safety value
in society as build-up frustrations are vented through the route of social mobility

 ANDRE BETEILLE  ‘Caste, Class and Power, 1971’  mobility in a closed and stratified
caste system is difficult.
 M N SRINIVAS  study of Coorgs showed in Caste system alternate methods like
Sanskritization have evolved to move socially up, but this affects only cultural aspects and
not structural aspects

 Industrial and modern societies  mobility is widespread

industrial societies lay emphasis on formal qualifications at the time of recruitment

Children of working class parents often gain the qualifications before they set out to look for
employment

inter-generation mobility is much higher

 As a society makes a transition from traditional to modern, it becomes more fluid.

 SOROKIN  ‘Social Mobility, 1927’

mobility is in fact functional for society as it promotes efficiency and social order.

He compared vertical mobility to ‘stairs and elevators’ and as ‘blood in human body’

 upward social mobility is more common than downward social mobility

demand for unskilled manual labor has declined significantly in the wake of technological
advancement and the shift from the need for industry workers to service that call for
specialization entail higher position

 DAVIS AND MOORE  reward system of the society that facilitates individual mobility in
society
 Social mobility
breaks the exclusiveness of classes and makes them open.
It makes social hierarchies more fluid and less rigid.
Equal access to all strata becomes extension of idea of equality in modern societies
helps in making use of best possible use of available talent

 DAVID GLASS in his study of England  ‘Social Mobility in Britain, 1954’

found out that mobility was low as there was rampant elite self-recruitment

as a result, there were only middle management and lower level positions were left for
others.
 ‘short ranged’  mobility in the immediate adjacent occupational groups
Long range  Bottom-to-Top; Top-to-Bottom  rare

 Duncan and Blau  ‘The American Occupational Structure, 1967’

which was one of the largest mobility study ever conducted in America with a sample of
20,000 people.

They also concluded that ‘long range’ mobility is rare.

 Goldthorpe  in his mobility study in Britain concluded that mobility largely happens
in immediate ranks in hierarchy and absolute mobility – from lower ranks to higher
ranks – is extremely low.
SOCIAL MOBILITY – OPEN AND CLOSED SYSTEMS
OPEN SYSTEMS
 systems which offer free mobility from one stratum to another and there are no barriers
which cannot be overcome

 systems treat individuals as equal and it is also pre-supposed that they have equal access to
all opportunities.

 Ex: Class

 USA that anyone can travel the path from ‘log cabin to Whitehouse’.
CLOSED SYSTEMS
 marked by rigid boundaries which are unassailable.

Individuals cannot cross their strata in ordinary circumstances.

Often this is facilitated by ascriptive nature of membership to particular strata or exclusivity

of membership.

Ex: Caste system, gender stratification, ethnic stratification

CLOSED STRATIFICATION TYPES
 AGE  Masai Tribes in Africa

 CASTE

 GENDER

 ETHNICITY

 SLAVERY

 ESTATE
Sorokin listed four primary factors which affects Social Mobility -
 The demographic factors  Age, Sex, Race
 Talent and Ability
 The faulty distribution of individuals in social positions
 The change of the social environment – Industrialization, Legal Restrictions etc.

Pierre Bourdieu  ‘An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, 1992’

4 types of capital place a person in a certain social category – Economic capital,

Social capital, Symbolic capital and Cultural capital etc.

These broaden the scope of meaning social mobility

General factors affecting mobility can be both personal and structural factors are –
 Industrialization and urbanization – Lipset upheld that industrialization led to high mobility
rates in England and it is true for the rest of the world as well.

‘Lipset – Zetterberg Thesis’.

 Education – Duncan and Blau in their study of America found that mobility is higher among
blue collar workers and white collar professionals

 Social Capital and Social Status – Giddens and Bottomore in their ‘closure thesis’

those who occupy the superior positions seek to retain them for their own selves and for
their kin.

Social capital is used to monopolize the occupational positions.

 Occupation

 Social and Cultural Values – liberal or conservative

 Environmental changes

Natural disasters lead to downwards mobility. Favorable changes like good rain, good
weather support economic activity and agriculture leading to prosperity.

 Social movements also help in collective mobility.

 Law and constitution

 Migration
 Physical features – Sally Loverman indicates factors like constant, physical looks also provide
an edge

 Technology – Industrialization in Europe had a major impact on collective mobility.

 Subjective factors – Individual and collective aspirations also play an important role.

Veblen’s  ‘The Theory of the Leisure Class’

Srinivas  Sanskritization
Merton  Reference Group

 Type of system – Open vs Closed

 Cultural factors - Sorokin in his American study concluded that racial and ethnic lineage also
helps or retards mobility.

 Political Factors – Democracy, dictatorship, theocracy etc all provide for different avenues of
social mobility.

TYPES OF MOBILITY ON A BROADER LEVEL –

HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL MOBILITY
INTRA-GENERATIONAL AND INTER-GENERATIONAL MOBILITY
STRUCTURAL AND INDIVIDUAL MOBILITY STRUCTURAL MOBILITY
ABSOLUTE AND RELATIVE MOBILITY