wicked anomie: sociology run amok

Undergraduates and Feminism

2009-11-14T12:54:00.004-05:00

This week in Social Problems we covered inequalities of sex and gender. To conclude the week, I talked a bit about feminism and showed different examples of feminist sites and arguments. Then I asked my students to reflect on feminism. Do they call themselves feminists? Is feminism still necessary? Why or why not?

Nobody claimed the feminist label, but 69% (18/26) argued that feminism is still important and useful. Of those who said it was important but did not claim the label for themselves, about half indicated it's because they personally do not fight for gender equality. They believe there should be equality, they believe there currently isn't, and they believe this is wrong. However, for them, feminism involves taking active polital stance to rectify the situation. As such, labeling oneself 'feminist' is not the same sort of self-categorization as labeling oneself 'liberal.'

The other half either didn't claim the label because they don't like to label themselves, or for no specified reason.

Of the eight that do not still feel feminism is useful:

All of them agree that gender inequality still exists. Three dislike feminism because it is too White and middle class. They feel gender inequality is worth fighting against, but they feel like calling themselves feminists means they would be favoring the fight for one at the expense of others.

The other five feel that gender inequality is natural and - yes - even good. There are biological differences, and men make naturally better leaders. It's God's intention, or they just prefer for men to rule (these are women making such arguments).

There was another interesting tidbit regarding the belief about feminist battles. Most students favored (you know, IF they were to be a feminist) a more essentialist approach to gender equality. They feel that many of the differences we see between men and women are natural and we don't really need to bother with that - socialization amplifies differences that are already there. Inequality mainly results from our society's tendency to favor male attributes and contributions. In other words, feminism should focus less on getting rid of gender stereotypes and more on valuing the feminine. Though many of those same students are quick to argue that we shouldn't punish people when their gender performance does deviate from the norm.

So, they seem to interpret gender differences as being aggregate traits rather than categorical ones. They are true on average, but not in total. In other words, maybe the categories are socially constructed, and socialization further shifts these gender differences into even more of a binary, but the basis is still biological to some extent.

I think there might be a research project in this...

My [insert relevant dimension] Privilege Statement

2009-11-12T10:57:00.002-05:00

Over on My BackStage, Pitse1eh expresses her joy at not having to teach inequalities again for a while, because paying constant attention to existing societal inequalities is just so damn depressing. And she's right.

I'm teaching Social Problems for the first time right now, and a big chunk of that is inequality. I'm teaching it again next semester. To high school students (egads).

The privileged nature of this orientation to teaching inequality is rooted in the fact that we, due to our social location, can ignore most inequalities if we want to. We can blithely go through our lives completely unengaged with the idea that there are structural inequalities that disproportionately hurt members of some groups comared to others. Because we are both White, and part of a heterosexual dyadic marital arrangement, and ambigiously religious, the only inequality Pitse1eh and I are really on the shit end of is gender.

So we are forced to pay attention to discrimination, "isms", prejudice, etc. in order to teach others about this insidious underbelly of our society. But others are forced to pay attention to these things because they live it.

So here's my privilege statement:

I'm still knee-deep in the insidious underbelly of inequality, always on the lookout for examples and studies to bring to my students. So, when I see something like this, yes I feel sad. But another part of me is super excited.

YES! WHAT AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF RACISM!!!

Because, in a very real way, I am a Collector of Isms.

And that list of resources olderwoman just put up will be a lovely addition to my collection.

Racism, for me, is not a lived experience. It is an academic inquiry. How does that impact my teaching of it? Or the students' listening? The White woman teaching about racism one week - is she heard differently the following week when she teaches about sexism?

I love these guys

2009-11-08T16:52:00.001-05:00

Where's OUR avalance of wtf?

2009-11-07T08:03:00.001-05:00

Mindhacks recently posted about the "giant avalanche of wtf" that ensues if you Google "says psychologist." Clearly, someone needed to Google "says sociologist."

Here's the top 10:

1. Turkish Public Mostly Against Establishing Relations with Armenia, says sociologist
2. Climate change offers Europe a chance to change the way the world solves problems by drawing in poorer countries, says sociologist
3. "Make no mistake, there is a new economy," says sociologist
4. Puppy love should be avoided 'to make later relationships easier', says sociologist
5. Turkish Schools World's Most Global Movement, says sociologist
6. Americans Lack Family Time, says sociologist
7. Sex workers are not always victims, says sociologist
8. Race not a Black and White Issue, says Sociologist
9. Young people return to church, says sociologist
10. "Indulto law works," says sociologist

Hmmm...seems like sociologists don't quite get the same avalanche of wtf. Clearly we are more awesome than psychologists. Right?

Right???

Soft Years

2009-11-06T13:28:00.003-05:00

It is not uncommon for sociology PhD candidates to take what is called a "soft year" on the market. Basically, your first year on the market is spent applying only to a careful selection of departments whose ranks you reallyreallyreally want to join. After getting all those rejections out of the way, you wait a year and try again--this time casting the net more widely.

This is my soft year.

From here on out it shall be referenced as TP Soft. Because (a) I think tp is a good tangential reference for this year's abysmal job market, and (b) my soft year is more than just soft. It's quilted, for extra softeness:

You see, dear reader, I am only applying for one job this year. One position. One department.

One.

And as much as I would really like this job, I know my chances are slim. My application is submitted. The voodoo doll has been given offerings of chocolate and wine.

And now I wait.

Teaching Logical Fallacies in Social Problems

2009-10-26T08:14:00.006-04:00

Because of post hoc changes I've made to my social problems curriculum, I now have two extra days coming up in a few weeks where nothing is scheduled (I scrapped their third multiple choice quiz and am having them do a series of four assignments that will help prepare them for their final project instead).

I'm thinking about filling the extra days with instruction on logical fallacies and an in-class activity. The vast majority of these students are not sociology majors. They aren't planning on going into research, either. They will graduate and get all different sorts of jobs, and many will leave the world of academia behind forever. More important than deep theoretical understandings of social problems is an ability to critically approach information about social problems as it is presented to them (likely via the media).

I think the best place to find a good debate to deconstruct is in the comments thread of a controvertial post. But it will have to be a good thread. Anybody know any controversial posts with really good comment threads?

So, the project would go something like this:

1. A lecture on Logical Fallacies: How to spot them, how to refute them.
2. A review of the basic components of analyzing a social problem: distinguishing descriptive conditions from subjective concerns, determining the root influence of the subjective concern (belief about descriptive conditions, values, morals), finding the counterarguments.
3. Find a good post on a problem that is relevant and interesting. The one that gave me this idea is Why Would Scholastic Book Fairs Ban Books With Same-Sex Parents in Them?
4. To prep, I would take the article and comments thread and make a handout out of it, numbering the comments for easy reference.
5. Give each student a copy of the article and about 10 comments. The student must analyse the comments for claims being made about descriptive conditions, what subjective concern is being raised and why, and are there any logical fallacies present.
6. Conclude with students sharing any interesting comments and what their analysis of it was.
7. They submit their work, and I can put together a general overview of what they found to present to them the next class period (I wonder how long that would take.)

Another option, which I think might be more fun, less work for me, but would it be as instructive, since they're not seeing real-life examples of the fallacies and arguments?

1. Do the lecture on logical fallacies and the review of how to deconstruct a social problem.
2. Pass out a controversial article.
3. Have students write five comments of their own on the article. One of the comments would use their knowledge of how to deconstruct a social problem to agree with whatever is being said, then a second would use that same knowledge to disagree. Then they pick their three favorite logical fallicies, and write comments that illustrate each.

Either way, I think the results would make for a good blog post.

Obedience and Group Processes

2009-10-07T05:32:00.004-04:00

Yesterday was Group Processes day in my Introductory Sociology class. We covered the more insidious processes - fun stuff like the bystander effect, groupthink, conformity, and obedience. I talked about the classics - Kitty Genovese, Milgram, Asch. I also threw in PrankNET, who in one of their more notable pranks, managed to get three female KFC employees to go outside, remove all of their clothing and urinate on each other. In addition, I discussed the strip search prank call scam, showing the 20/20 video of the case from the state in which I teach. On the instructions of a caller posing as a cop, a McDonalds manager had a girl strip naked, then brought in her fiance, who, over the course of about three hours, proceeded to (on instruction) have her do jumping jacks, spanked her, and had her perform oral sex on him.

The hardest part is convincing people these aren't isolated incidents, and that those involved aren't inherently uncaring or stupid. But you do have to wonder about the spanking and sexual assault. Surely at this point the guy would figure out it's not really a cop on the other line? But with that, the holocaust, and women being murdered in public (I also brought in modern examples of that), it's a depressing day. What I only just now discovered, however, is this more lighthearted example:

Fishing for suckers

Perhaps next time I'll include that one. Maybe emulate Professor Moody's style of teaching the unforgivable curses. Start off with some lighthearted and funny examples, then move on to the more nefarious consequences of those same processes.

Fighting over Dissertation Advisors

2009-10-02T12:41:00.006-04:00

This is absolute insanity. At Brunel University, law students had to literally stand in line and wait to get a dissertation advisor. First come first serve. Apparently, eager students were lining up as early as 8pm the night before. One collapsed, and while being dragged away by medics, begged to be allowed to stay in line. Fights broke out. I'm guessing someone was trying to cut.

It reminds me of people camping out in line for concert tickets. Except this is for dissertation advisors.

Crazy.

They could at least have a vitual line. Or do it like Ticketmaster - sales open at 8am, order by phone.

I wonder if the advisors have any say in who they get?

Grades as a Measure of Course Difficulty

2009-09-28T11:02:00.005-04:00

This is the current grade distribution for my Social Problems class. It's obviously not the normal curve you're "supposed" to have, but generally I'm okay with a distribution like this, though I'd prefer the modal grade to be a B. About half the class has an A at the moment, and the vast majority have at least a C. Attendance in this class is good. People seem to be paying attention, they contribute and ask questions, nod along, etc.

This is the current grade distribution for my Introductory Sociology class. The modal grade is a B, and all but one student is passing (and that person is an absentee student). I'm generally okay with this, but I'd prefer there to be more C's and a handful of students getting Ds and Fs. These students seem to be just skating by without any effort. (Oh and the Intro students really are skating by - attendance is typically at about 50%, compared to 90% in my 8am Social Problems class).

Why on Earth would it bother me that students aren't doing worse in my classes? Do I want my kids to fail? Well, no. It's more about what those grades imply to me. A more normal distribution makes me think I'm not handing out A's like lollipops, but I'm not making it so my students aren't all working hard but still sinking either. My underlying assumption is that effort is also going to fall into a normal distribution, along with intelligence. As such, if too many people are getting A's, it means that the A's are coming too easily.

So, as I was evaluating the students' progress thus far, I found myself thinking, "Egads! I've made these classes too easy." And I know I'm basing this thought entirely on the grades. Not "enough" are failing or doing poorly. Surely, if the distribution of student talent and intelligence is normal, then my grade distribution should be as well, right? Well, maybe. But maybe not.

I have some longitudinal "data" on at least one of these courses. This is the third time I've taught Intro (minor modifications each time), but it's the first time the grade distribution hasn't come out closer to normal. So I know the curriculum isn't "too easy" in and of itself. What's changed?

Well, I'm at a new school this semester. What can we infer from this? Are the students at the new school just smarter? Probably not. They're both public, state schools. Do the students here work harder? Maybe. Maybe they do the assigned readings, whereas I know the students at the last school usually didn't. Maybe my teaching skills have grown by such leaps and bounds since the last time I taught this class over a year ago that the students are just learning so much better! But, nice as that thought is, I honestly don't think that's it.

So what are some other plausible explanations? And do I adjust the course accordingly? Make it harder, so it's not so easy for students to get an A? I'm thinking I should, but not this semester. I've already established a baseline here, and I don't want to shake things up too much halfway through.

Teh Internets Hasn't made ME Stoopid

2009-09-27T20:00:00.006-04:00

So I was, like, TOTALLY just surfin' the webs, ya know, like seeyin whut wuz up in the world and shit - I do like to keep up with the world - and I saw this post by JOhn Quiggen on Crooked Timber, "Oh noes! Teh Internets makes u gulible".

And I thought, gee, Im on the net all teh tyme, and I'm a grad student! And I TEACH college students! I'm not stoopid OR gulible. But they link to this study where the researchers that did this urban myth study (ass opposed to the much more horrendous SUBurban myth - U know what Im talking about)and they PROVED that actually (if you're in Aulstralia) and you get on the internet, IT MAKES YOU DUMB. Cuz u lose the ability to distinguish fact from myth. I mean, they surveyed 5,000 people! (More than actually and I guess that means 5,001.) I dont understand why that John Quiggen dude sez that's bad research, I mean 5,001 is a BIG number.

And I can recognize good studies when I see them. For example, I know why the earth's getting hotter. I read about it once on this website, and it looks TOTALLY legit. bUT it says that

"You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature."

And did you see that fancy chart? STATISTICS DON'T LIE.

Also, I took statistics and I'm TOTALLY smrt. So I KNOW. JOhn, Quiggen, I think ur the one who's been on teh internet too long cuz there's no answer to the question ur trying to give bonus marks for:

“Which basic concept of classical hypothesis testing is ignored in this study of ‘ability to detect erroneous information’”

And then the Lord sent two research angels, versed in statistics and GIS

2009-09-20T09:58:00.010-04:00

In the Bible (book of Genesis), God sends two angels to the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. These angels were charged with the task of evaluating the rate of sin within the walls. If the people were completely overridden by sin, God would destroy them.

What if those angels were statisticians, with access to GIS and geomapping software? How would the story have been different?

Some geographers at Kansas State University recently did an analysis of the spacial distribution of EVIL in the United States. Which part of the country is most afflicted by sloth? Lust? Greed? Envy? Wrath? Gluttony? Pride?

That's right, folks - these geographers have operationalized sin, quantified it, then measured and mapped it. Pride is the aggregate distribution of all other sins, since it is supposedly the root of all evil (though one could also make a good case for apathy). Here's how the sins are measured (and here's a good view of the maps):

Greed: Average incomes versus total inhabitants below the poverty line
Envy: Total number of thefts (robbery, burglary, larceny, and stolen cars)
Wrath: Total number of violent crimes (murder, assault and rape) per capita
Lust: Sexually transmitted diseases per capita
Gluttony: Number of fast-foot restaurants per capita
Sloth: Expenditures on arts, entertainment and recreation versus rate of employment
Pride: An aggregate of the six other sins

By looking at sin at the aggregate level, what they're doing here is examining sin as a social fact, as opposed to an individual trait. This would be a good extension of a lesson on Durkheim and suicide as a social fact. This study really shows why we really can't truly measure concepts such as this across space and time, since the meaning of these individual acts will vary. Are the same acts categorized and labeled as rape in Montana as they are in New York? How violent does a person need to be before they are arrested for assault, and does that differ by region? Are we really measuring rates of STDs, or rates at which people get treatment for them? If my measure of gluttony is different than yours, can I apply my measure to your actions and call you gluttonous? Or should I be using your measures to evaluate your actions? Is this aggregate data showing different rates of sin, or is it just an effect of different meanings attached to the concepts?

This would also be useful in showing how we can't extrapolate individual characteristics from aggregate data. For example, I live in Indiana (but teach in Kentucky). This region is low in envy, lust, wrath, and pride; average in gluttony, sloth, and greed; and not particularly high in any of the sins. Apparently I live in one of the more virtuous parts of the country.

I guess I can cancel that fire and brimstone insurance.

But does this aggregate data also indicate that I, Anomie, have greater odds of being virtuous? NO. The fact that I am virtuous in every way is merely a coincidence. You see, their data is not measuring individual sinful behavior. Rather, it's measuring social facts, and structural conditions, that they hypothesize to be correlated with individual sinful behavior (but I take issue with some of the measures). For example:

I don't have any STDS. CLEARLY I am not lustful. CLEARLY.
If you have more fast food restaurants within a five mile radius of your house than I do, are you more gluttonous than me? No. But at the aggregate level, this may be a good quick and dirty device. At least they didn't use obesity rates as their measure.
And if I make $100k (one can dream) in Indiana, then move elsewhere to a job with the same salary, does that mean my greediness has changed along with my place of residence?

Now, excuse me while I get back to my slothful appreciation of art.

Quiz Question

2009-09-14T18:04:00.001-04:00

A functionalist, a symbolic interactionist, and a conflict theorist walk into a bar. The bartender says he doesn't serve sociologists. Match each of the following responses to the most likely theorist:

A. “What do you mean by that?!? I'm here to drink beer, not sociologists!”

B. “You may control the distribution of beer here, but I'm the one with the gun.”

C. “If you want this bar to continue to maintain equilibrium, you will give me my beer.”

Massachusetts has Lowest Divorce Rate in Country

2009-09-13T13:33:00.000-04:00

Awesome.

Personal Branding for Academic Job Markets?

2009-09-12T14:33:00.005-04:00

Earlier today, the following question arrived in my inbox:

Good morning, my dear academic friends,

As I am preparing my first apps to go out on Monday, it has been suggested to me that I should "brand" myself to make my image more memorable. The main focus of my research is on women and reproduction and, therefore, a fertility symbol as a seal or near my name and/or signature is what this person has proposed. What do you all think of this idea? Have you seen personal branding used in academia? Does it seem appropriate for job applications?

My thought is no. Don't do it. Being memorable isn't always a good thing. Showing creativity and flair can be beneficial, but as soon as someone looks at your seal or symbol and says "huh? weird..." or worse "wtf?," your credibility goes down.

One other dear academic friend has responded, saying no as well:

I say no for a number of reasons. First, I would be hesitant to brand myself with a fertility symbol; it's a very limited view of your research or potential as a teacher. Second, you are taking a big chance on whether or not they will "get it"; you don't want them to think you are expressing your fertility. Third, academics are still a very traditional environment, best to play the game. Just my opinion......

What do the rest of you think? If not this, is there any way to stand out without endangering your credibility? Personally, I'm going to send out Pink, scented vitaes (by owl post, of course). And my application materials will be placed in a handmade envelope, sealed with wax. At first I was thinking my seal should just be a big, fancy "A", but I don't want people to mistake it for a scarlet letter. Or maybe they'd just think I was a loud and proud atheist.

What would a good seal for a self & identity scholar be? A mirror? Drama masks? Or are seals and symbols a bad idea?

The Kid Recounts Obama's Speech

2009-09-08T16:18:00.002-04:00

As many of you know, President Obama gave a speech to America's students today. Well, to most of the students. The ones whose parents aren't paranoid that Obama's going to hypnotize the masses over television, creating Obama's Army, later to be used to overthrow the capitalist system and democracy and all that is good and pure in the world, that is. So what does a 7yr old take away from Obama's attempt at indoctrination? Here's a list of take-home points my second-grader told me:

Remember if you have friends, school will be funnest if you do.

If you're mean, you'll have to go to the principal (for the ones who are new).

Your teachers help you out a lot on things you need help with.

School is a safe place to be.

Kim Possible and Sexist Bad Guys

2009-09-06T19:54:00.004-04:00

This is Shego. She is Dr. Dakken's sidekick in the show Kim Possible. Dr Drakken is the main, but not only, villain in the show.

My daughter wanted to see Kim Possible, so we loaded some episodes onto our Roku. As we watched the first episode together, I began to wish I had vetted the show. It is a complete waste of time, and possibly worse, since it upholds many gender stereotypes I'd rather she not learn from within the confines of my home. That's its worse crime; there are others. However, you can't really escape such problems. Get a show that is good with gender, and it's bad with race, etc. But I like for the stuff she watches to at least have a good underlying message.

I am getting drawn into the show despite myself, however. Particularly, the Shego character intrigues me. She is clearly the most intelligent of the bunch - probably of the good guys and the bad guys. And yet she is the sidekick. And the sexism she has to deal with - why bother? Why be sidekick to megalomaniac, narcissistic, idiots who treat her poorly? There's no explanation that I can find. According to Wikipedia, she is unmotivated, lazy, and quick-tempered. She lounges about the lair reading magazines and filing her nails. Girly on the surface, BUT they're villain magazines, and the nails are actually metal claws on her gloves. That makes it a bit cooler.

Dr. Drakken has an evil cousin, Motor Ed. He is always hitting on Shego. This particular exchange caught my attention. It went something like this:

Shego and Motor Ed are driving down the highway, with the goal of enacting Motor Ed's "plan," which Shego is in the dark about. Shego is in disguise, wearing loud colorful clothing and big gaudy jewelry:

Motor Ed: “You need to be chewing gum. You'll need that to help pull off your role in The Plan.”

Shego: “So what's the plan?”

Motor Ed: “Cruising at supersonic speed across country with a hot babe at my side!”

Shego: “SO I'M HERE AS AN ORNAMENT?!?”

Motor Ed: “No. The fuzzy dice are an ornament. You, babe, are an ACCESSORY.”

Shego, in a fit of rage, attacks Motor Ed.

What I wonder is, what message do kids take from exchanges like this? And the show in general? Shego is described as quick-tempered, but damn - look at what she's faced with. Most of the time, her anger seems quite warranted. But do kids see that? Or do they see Motor Ed saying something funny, and Shego getting mad as usual. Do they see the sexism in Motor Ed and Dr. Drakken? And do they associate that with the idiot evil guys, and therefore maybe a character flaw? Or is it just funny and something they might be inclined to mimic? Because it was funny on the show?

In the end, the villain relationships here remind me of those sitcoms with the lout of a husband and the beautiful smart wife and what the fuck is she doing with that guy? And don't forget the commercials.

A Peek at This ABD Adjunct's Schedule

2009-09-05T19:21:00.006-04:00

It has been two weeks now since I started adjuncting, and I'm starting to fall into a rhythm with my schedule. And I like the rhythm that is emerging. So, here's a little window into one ABD adjunct's world:

Mondays: I work from home. I get up at about 7:15 and spend the next hour getting dressed, eating, and checking out what happened online while I slept. My husband and kid are out the door at 8:15, and I get to work. I am feeling gung-ho and ready to tackle the week. I work diligently until 2:30, when I have to go get the kid from school. Most of the time up until then was spent prepping for classes - I prep for the entire week all at once. From 2:30-3:30, I am with the kid, helping her with her homework, hearing about her day, etc. From 3:30-5:30, I read RSS feeds and otherwise fart about online, blogging, etc. It's not entirely unrelated to work, since I also use this time to compile my examples that I use in class to teach. I label each item of interest with "sociology" and with a more topic-specific tag, like race or gender. From 5:30-7:30 is spent cooking, eating, spending time with family. 7:30 to 9:00 is for my online teaching job. I'm in bed by 10.

Tuesdays: I am up at 6:15, out the door at 7:15, and in the classroom at 8am for Social Problems. I am back in my office and ready to work by 9:30, and work pretty nonstop until 12:45, when I leave for my 1:00 Intro to Soc class. It ends just in time to go get my kid from school, repeat evening from Monday. My work time on Tuesday and Thursdays is devoted to my dissertation. This contradicts the advice I hear most, to have all your class prep on the same days you teach, so you have entire days to focus on research. I find it easier to work on my dissertation in my office, and prep for classes from home. Something about the environmental cues. This also contradicts the fact that I have office hours during this time. But the only person I've seen so far is one of the department's grad students, looking for advice on applying to PhD programs (the place I'm adjuncting is terminal masters).

Wednesdays: Up at 7:15, and out the door by 8:45 - this time, to go grocery shopping. I find that this is a very peaceful time to grocery shop. I am back and at my computer ready to work by 10:30. I am supposed to work pretty nonstop until 2:30. But I'm finding this hard. My mind starts wandering. These four hours I try dedicate to all the "other" stuff - not dissertation, not teaching prep. Other research projects. Wednesdays are YMCA days, and I take the kid swimming from 3:45-5:30. I get about an hour of websurfing in while she's swimming. Also, I spend an extra hour in the evening going over the next day's lectures I prepared back on Monday in addition to doing my online teaching stuff.

Thursdays: See Tuesday

Fridays: I want to make my Fridays like my Mondays, the idea being I can devote more time to research. But I am finding my brain to be totally fried at this point. Seriously. I have difficulty stringing two thoughts together. I can't even hold intelligent conversations, let alone trust myself to work on something important. I usually get about four solid hours of work in the entire day, and it's work an hour, take an hour off, work an hour, take an hour off, etc. So far, the off time is spent watching episodes of Dexter.

Saturdays and Sundays I don't really have a schedule, but I typically spend about four hours each day working on research and dissertating, and another two hrs each day catching up on feeds and other online vacuums. And, of course, my hour and a half each day teaching online.

Total:

10 hrs DISSERTATION
7 hrs COURSE PREP
6 hrs IN THE CLASSROOM
10 hrs ONLINE TEACHING
8 hrs RESEARCH NOT RELATED TO DISSERTATION

So, I spend about 41 hrs a week working. Not bad, really. I don't feel so bad about my Friday Dexter marathons anymore.

And if you can count SOME of my RSS reading as work - since I get my teaching examples and ideas from there, after all - then you can bump that number up even more. Also, isn't social networking an important part of being an academic? Keeping up ties with other sociologists and whatnot???

Let's just call that work too.

Now I'm WAY over 40hrs per week. I should totally take tomorrow off. I deserve it.

Social Problems Final Project Assignment

2009-09-02T12:48:00.001-04:00

Final Project Assignment

Why We Need Academic Blogging

2009-08-26T07:15:00.001-04:00

After reading this, I've decided that all my Academic comments will be delivered via blog. I particularly enjoyed #105 (via The Monkey Cage).
How to Publish a Scientific Comment in 1 2 3 Easy Steps

Which Social Problems?

2009-08-25T17:17:00.004-04:00

"If I were a genie granting you the ability to magically wish away any five social problems, which would you choose and why?"

This was the question I posed my social problems class on the first day. Here's a compilation of the problems that got more than one vote:

42 racism/ ethnic relations
40 poverty/ economic inequality
40 substance abuse
36 war and terrorism
34 rape
33 murder
28 violence
18 sexual assault & harassment
12 sexuality discrimination
12 environment
11 sexism/ gender inequality
10 discrimination
10 crime
9 religious bias
8 divorce
8 abortion
7 starvation
6 prostitution
5 child abuse
5 adultery
4 pornography
4 justice system
2 animal abuse
2 stereotyping
2 inequality
2 apathy/mean-spirited people
2 prejudice
2 HIV
2 social class discrimination
2 sexual behavior

After they made their lists, I had them consider what values were underlying their choices, and I talked a bit about what this means for defining and labeling things as social problems. I noticed a few interesting things about the way they made their lists. First, they CHEATED! I asked for five social problems, and damn near everyone had at least one of their numbered problems be a list, like

-rape and murder
-violence and murder
-rape and sexual harassment
-war and terrorism
-sexual and gender discrimination

Those were the biggies as far as combining things goes. I thought it was interesting how many students put rape and murder together as the same social problem. One person put abortion and divorce together, which I also found interesting. I wonder what the two people who chose "sexual behavior" meant, too. I was surprised starvation was so low; I had this beauty queen image in my head "I want to end world hunger!" Only one person put homelessness. However, another person put homeless animals. I'll be asking some follow-up questions Thursday.

Also Thursday I'm going to talk a little bit about what sociology is (I went in today thinking they had all taken Intro - NOT even close to true). Then I'll weave that into how to approach social problems from a critical perspective, with a sociological eye. I'm going to present them with this tabulated result of their exercise from today, and have them come up with criteria for how they would simplify the list by making larger categories under which to place the problems. Then the next Tuesday perhaps I can compile their categories and come back with an overview of how people made their choices...

Social Problems

2009-08-24T14:38:00.005-04:00

I will begin teaching my first Social Problems class promptly at 8am tomorrow morning. One problem: I am ill. Violently ill. I already started the weekend with the Sinus Infection from Hell. That should have been sufficient, but NO. I managed to get it under control in time for Sunday. My birthday. And so I went off my diet. You know, cuz it's my birthday and I should get to eat cake. And cupcakes. And spanakopita. And french toast. And now I'm paying for that AND my headache's back. But I can't take anything for it since I'm on a liquid diet today. Ugh.

Why is this a teaching-related problem? I reserved today to prep for my courses. I'm not too concerned about the Intro course. I've taught it before, and it is in the afternoon. I have 4hrs between my Social Problems class and that one.

But Social Problems is a 8am! And I've never taught it before! And I am not at my best today. So here's what I'm thinking:

I already have the syllabus printed out. I don't know how to work the tech equipment in that room anyway, so relying on it for the first day probably isn't wise. But there is a chalkboard (I went and peeked). So, I'll go in, write the course and my name on the chalkboard so they can be assured they're in the right place. Then, I'll introduce myself and jump right into an activity.

What is a social problem? I'll have the students spend a few minutes

(1) defining the term "social problem" and then...

(2) quietly make a list of what they think are the biggest social problems of today. After some reasonable span of time, I...

(3) put them into smaller groups to go through their lists together and make a rank-ordered list as a group (and get their feet wet with the talking). After another reasonable span of time, I will...

(4) have the class come together and share their results. There are 55 students, so I probably won't have each group share their list. And I don't think the chalkboard is big enough for them all to write their list either. Maybe that part can just be a general discussion, or each group can select a representative to come to the front and we can have a panel or something. We can discuss where people disagreed, where they agreed, and what criterion they used to make their definitions and lists. Hopefully from this I will easily be able to...

(5) segue into a discussion about how social problems are really "social problems," in that they are socially constructed and rooted in certain value systems. Social problems involve objective conditions for which a large group of people have a subjective concern. And maybe we can talk about the difference between descriptive, normative, and evaluative claims. Then we'll go over the syllabus, see exactly what "social problems" we are covering, how we are going to approach each topic from a critical standpoint - why is it considered a social problem, who says so, and what do we know about it, and are there opposing viewpoints? - and...

6) talk a little bit about how the class is going to go (structure, grading, tests, policies, etc.).

Then I let them out about 10 minutes early so I can fiddle with the equipment, figure out how to set up PowerPoint and video and stuff.

That should work, right?

Self and Cyberself Development

2009-08-21T08:48:00.006-04:00

I was sitting on the couch one day when my 7yr old daughter Jillian ran past me into the restroom. Upon emerging she explained, "I had to go to the bathroom so I flew home and put a sleepy sign on my fairy. Because if there's a sleepy sign, nobody will try to talk to you." You see, she had been playing in the online world Pixie Hollow, which is sort of like a Second Life for kids.

These are virtual worlds, where people create avatars that allow them to maneuver the online landscapes, interact with other avatars, and engage in varying activities. They are not games, in the general sense of the word. You can play games in these worlds, but you can also just go sit under a tree and have a picnic with a friend. You can get a job in these worlds, and make money in their currency. Then you can go shopping, buy a house, design clothes, etc.

Watching her learn and grow with this cyberspace world in addition to our standard, "real" one has been very interesting. Take her statement to me about the bathroom, for example. We have our theories about how people develop their sense of self - how they learn to distinguish themselves from the people around them, to develop a generalized other, to distinguish self-as-subject from self-as-object. But what about self versus avatar? Where is that line and how do kids learn to maneuver it? In Jillian's statement about the restroom, she easily shifts self-perspective within the same sentence. She is both the human peeing in the bathroom and the fairy sleeping in her home in Pixie Hollow. Her avatar is a character she plays, but it is also her. And the other fairies are her friends.

In Pixie Hollow, the kids interact with one another mainly via chat. Pixie Hollow offers a set of standard phrases from which to choose, a fairly large collection of emoticons (with the meaning of the face helpfully included), and they can type in things to say, as well. They can "whisper" to other fairies they are friends with (private chat), or just say something to anyone in "hearing" distance.

By spending this time online, Jillian is also learning a whole new set of social norms. For example, one day she informed me that you have to turn caps lock on if you want the person to whom you're talking to know you're mad. I have no idea how she figured that one out. When I asked her, she said "it just is." Another day she was sitting at the computer and asked me "birb? what's birb?" I went over to her computer, and she had a chat window up, and the other fairy had just said "brb." So I told her, "Oh, that means 'be right back.' Your friend had to leave the computer for a second. You can type a 'k' right after that to let her know you got the message if you want."

This morning, I heard Jillian moving about in her bedroom. I peeked in, and she said "Oh hi. I'm just preparing for my quest." She was finding all her fairy dolls and lining them up. "I don't have Iridessa, though."

"Perhaps after school today we can use your giftcard from your birthday and go look for an Iridessa."

She thought for a second, and said "No. This quest I've been given is much more important than that. Rosetta lost her flowers, and she needs me to help her find them. We'll get an Iridessa later."

Paper Moon

2009-08-19T12:54:00.002-04:00

Interview season within the world of sociology kicked off with a whimper at ASA this year, with 30ish jobs and 500ish applicants. Now it's time to scamper back to our home bases and put together job talks that will blow all prospective departments out of the water. I have my practice job talk scheduled for October. At this time, I will put myself out there for my cohorts to rip apart, with the idea being that they will catch all the glaring problems with my presentation before I do it For The Win. In front of people who have a JOB I want.

Most of you are already well aware of the importance of having an engaging and informative job talk. Less discussed is the equally pivotal job talk musical interlude. Here's what I'm working on. Also, consider this Interview Attire, Take 2.

Orange Juice and Netbooks

2009-08-18T20:12:00.003-04:00

The Great Orange Juice Debacle of ASA is not a total catastrophe. I thought I had lost my netbook when my bottle of orange juice exploded in my bag during my flight home from the conference. It didn't even turn on! Not even after opening it up, cleaning it out, and letting it dry! However, I have been able to save some very important parts of it. Namely - the hard drive. I bought an enclosure for the hard drive off eBay for a very reasonable $6, screwed my hard drive into the case, and voila - external hard drive. I plugged it into my new netbook, and it worked! No data lost. Also, I was able to retrieve my RAM from the old netbook and use it to upgrade the new one. Now I have two external hard drives, a collection of RAM, and the skeleton of an orange-juicy netbook that may or may not still have some salvageable parts.

Now even if I had lost my data, it wouldn't have been too devastating. I would have lost my syllabi for my two courses I'm teaching this fall, and I would have lost some pictures. All stuff from the week before my trip. I back up my data pretty regularly. But still.

Lessons learned:

1. Never EVER put your computer and your drink in the same bag.
2. Orange juice kills computers.
3. Back up your data regularly.
4. In addition to regularly backing up your hard drive (or at the least, your important documents), it is also a good idea to do a special backup every time you prepare to go on a journey with your computer.
5. Lifeless computers can be harvested for parts. Even if those parts got orange juice on them.
6. Never give up hope.
7. eBay is your friend. Seriously. I tried Best Buy first, and all they had were $60 enclosure "kits." I don't even know what that means. It's a case and a cord. Seriously. Mine came with screws and a screwdriver, too. Free shipping.

PETA Wants You to Lose Weight

2009-08-17T12:00:00.006-04:00

“Trying to hide your thunder thighs and balloon belly is no day at the beach.”
-PETA Executive Vice President Tracy Reiman.
This new PETA billboard angers me. I think it has to do with the uncouthness of it. PETA's long been accused of sexism and racism in its advertising, but the sizeism is new to me. And one could argue they've always been uncouth, but I've never noticed such blatant name-calling in their ads before. There's a difference between trying to help people who want to lose weight by telling them they'd be thinner if they were vegetarian, and using name-calling as a way to shame people who think they're fat into not eating meat. The former is simply confusing correlation with causation - vegetarians tend to be thinner, but going vegetarian doesn't necessarily make one thinner. The latter, however, is a bullying tactic - i.e., "Really, we're calling you a blubberbutt whale because we care about you and want to help." And then you get stories like this:

We all sat there and stared at [the billboard] for a minute and everyone in the car was silent. No one wanted to mention my weight. I laughed it off as usual, but it really had made me so embarrassed, so self conscious and so ashamed about my weight that I dropped off my family at the oceanfront and left to go home, making the excuse that I wasn’t feeling well.

Yeah, PETA's got her right where they want her now! I bet she's at home throwing out all her meat AS WE SPEAK. Or not. But hey, what's a little dig to someone's self esteem when THE LIVES OF ANIMALS are at stake? And while we're on the topic of PETA, check out The Onion's take on the group:

Advocacy Group Decries PETA's Inhumane Treatment Of Women

What I find interesting about this video is that people can't seem to decide who it's making fun of. The Onion is definitely about satirizing news and events. But if you check out this comment thread on Feministing, you'll get an idea of how different people interpret satire differently. It reminds me of the study of viewer interpretations of The Colbert Report, which showed "conservatives were more likely to report that Colbert only pretends to be joking and genuinely meant what he said while liberals were more likely to report that Colbert used satire and was not serious when offering political statements."

Vegetarianism has always intersected with gender, race, and class in our country. How we eat is largely determined by what we have access to, as well. And you can't tell from the PETA ad, but fat-shaming is also a class issue. Jezebel has a good take on a Cintra Wilson's Critical Shopper review of J.C. Penny that was recently published in the New York Times, which excellently illustrates this point. The skillful way in which Wilson weaves in disgust for the "substandard" clothing at the "dowdy Middle American entity" with scorn for anyone above a size 8 was probably effortless because weight and social class were already woven together in her mind. This is evidenced in her statement about "the stress-thin, morbidly workaholic, Pilates-tortured Manhattan ectomorph" which Wilson holds in contrast to the J.C. Penny shopper.

Of course, PETA ignores all those idiosyncracies and intersections in favor of the lowest common denominator: "Look! Hot naked women! Okay, now that I have your attention, don't eat meat. It makes you fat. And that is BAD. Because then you're not hot and sexy. Who's going to look at you now? Huh? HUH??? Drop the meat. And the pounds."