sociology 36 hours

Social Problems

Most of the readers of this book are among the world’s privileged people—those who have enough to eat, a comfortable place to sleep, and who have the special opportunity to study the human condition. I offer this book in the hope that it will stimulate thinking about those who are in need, the state of our planet, and spark action toward making our world a better place.

S C

H R

O E

D E

R A

la in

/H em

is /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to

Social Problems

EIGHTH EDITION

John J. Macionis Kenyon College

Copyright © 2020, 2018, 2015 by Pearson Education, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This publication is protected by copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise. For information regarding permissions, request forms and the appropriate contacts within the Pearson Education Global Rights & Permissions Department, please visit www.pearsoned.com/permissions/.

Executive Portfolio Manager: Jeff Marshall Content Producer: Mary Donovan Content Developer: Hope Madden Portfolio Manager Assistant: Heather Torres Product Marketing Manager: Candice Madden Sr. Field Marketing Manager: Kelly Ross Content Producer Manager: Amber Mackey Content Development Manager: Brooke Wilson Art/Designer: Integra Software Services, Pvt Ltd.

Digital Studio Course Producer: Elissa Senra-Sargent

Full-Service Project Manager: Integra Software Services, Pvt Ltd.

Compositor: Integra Software Services, Pvt Ltd. Printer/Binder: LSC Communications, Inc. Cover Printer: Phoenix Color/Hagerstown Cover Design: Jennifer Hart Design Cover Credit: Juanmonino/Getty Images

Access Code Card: ISBN-10: 0-13-522793-3 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-522793-0

Revel Combo Card: ISBN-10: 0-13-556058-6 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-556058-7

Rental Edition: ISBN-10: 0-13-524704-7 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-524704-4

Loose-Leaf Edition: ISBN-10: 0-13-522924-3 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-522924-8

Instructor’s Review Copy: ISBN-10: 0-13-524714-4 ISBN-13: 978-0-13-524714-3

Acknowledgments of third-party content appear on the page, which constitute an extension of this copyright page.

PEARSON, ALWAYS LEARNING, and Revel are exclusive trademarks in the United States and/or other countries owned by Pearson Education, Inc., or its affiliates.

Unless otherwise indicated herein, any third-party trademarks that may appear in this work are the property of their respective owners and any references to third-party trademarks, logos, or other trade dress are for demonstrative or descriptive purposes only. Such references are not intended to imply any sponsorship, endorsement, authorization, or promotion of Pearson’s products by the owners of such marks, or any relationship between the owner and Pearson Education, Inc., or its affiliates, authors, licensees, or distributors.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Macionis, John J., author. Title: Social problems / John J. Macionis. Description: 8 Edition. | New York, NY : Pearson, [2019] | Revised edition of

the author’s Social problems, [2016] | Includes bibliographical references and indexes.

Identifiers: LCCN 2018042984| ISBN 9780135247143 | ISBN 0135247144 Subjects: LCSH: Social problems. Classification: LCC HN16 .M24 2019 | DDC 361.1–dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018042984

Brief Contents PART I Sociology’s Basic Approach

1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 2

PART II Problems of Social Inequality

2 Economic Inequality 32

3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 68

4 Gender Inequality 102

5 Sexuality and Inequality 136

6 Aging and Inequality 170

PART III Problems of Deviance, Conformity, and Well-Being

7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 198

8 Alcohol and Other Drugs 238

9 Physical and Mental Health 272

PART IV Problems of Social Institutions

10 Social Media 302

11 Economy and Politics 332

12 Work and the Workplace 360

13 Family Life 390

14 Education 416

15 Urban Life 444

PART V Global Problems

16 Population and Global Inequality 470

17 Technology and the Environment 498

18 War and Terrorism 522

v

Preface xix About the Author xxv

PART I Sociology’s Basic Approach

1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 2

Constructing the Problem 2

Seeing Patterns: The Sociological Imagination 4

Social Problems: The Basics 5 Social Problems over Time 6 The Social-Constructionist Approach 6 Claims Making 8 Problems and Social Movements 10 Social Problems: Eight Assertions 11 Social Problems: A Global Perspective 13

Analyzing Social Problems: Sociological Theory 13 The Structural-Functional Approach 13 The Social-Conflict Approach 15 The Feminist Approach 16 The Symbolic-Interaction Approach 17

Finding the Facts: Sociological Research 18 Research Methods 18 Truth, Science, and Politics 20 Truth and Statistics 20

Responding to Social Problems: Social Policy 21 Policy Evaluation 21 Policy and Culture 22 Policy and Politics 22

Politics: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 23

The Political Spectrum 23 Conservatives, Liberals, and Radicals 23 Social Issues 24 Economic Issues 24 Who Thinks What? 25

Going On from Here 26

A Defining Moment: A Call to Action: The Message of Martin Luther King Jr. 27

Defining Solutions 28 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 29

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 30

PART II Problems of Social Inequality

2 Economic Inequality 32

Constructing the Problem 32

Economic Inequality in the United States 35 Inequality of Income and Wealth 35

The Trend toward Increasing Economic Inequality 38 Taxation 39

The Rich and the Poor: A Social Profile 40 The Rich 40 The Poor 41 Who Are the Poor? A Closer Look 43 Working Families: Working Harder 44 The Working Poor 45 The Nonworking Poor 46 The Underclass 46

Problems Linked to Poverty 46 Poor Health 47 Substandard Housing 47 Homelessness 47 Limited Schooling 48 Crime and Punishment 48 Political Alienation 49

Responding to Poverty: The Welfare System 49 A Brief History of Welfare 49

A Defining Moment: U.S. Society Discovers Poverty 52

The 1996 Welfare Reform 53

Theories of Poverty 53 Structural-Functional Analysis: Some Poverty Is Inevitable 53 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining the Problem 55 Social-Conflict Analysis: Poverty Can Be Eliminated 56 Feminist Analysis: Poverty and Patriarchy 57

Politics and Economic Inequality: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 59

Conservatives: Personal Responsibility 59 Liberals: Societal Responsibility 60 The Radical Left: Change the System 61

Going On from Here 62 Defining Solutions 64

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 65 Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 66

3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 68 Constructing the Problem 68

Race and Ethnicity 71 Race 71 Ethnicity 72 Minorities 73 White Privilege 73 Immigration 74

Patterns of Majority–Minority Interaction 75 Genocide 75 Segregation 77

Contents

vi

Contents vii

A Defining Moment: Saying No to Segregation 77

Assimilation 78 Pluralism 79

The Social Standing of U.S. Minorities 79 Native Americans 79 African Americans 80 Asian Americans 82 Hispanic Americans/Latinos 83 Arab Americans 85

Prejudice 86 Stereotypes 86 Racism 86 Measuring Prejudice: The Social Distance Scale 87 Institutional Racism: The Case of Racial Profiling 87 Causes of Prejudice 88 Multiculturalism 89

Discrimination 89 Institutional Discrimination 89 Prejudice and Discrimination: A Vicious Circle 90 Microaggression 90 Affirmative Action: Reverse Discrimination or Cure for Prejudice? 90

Theories of Racial and Ethnic Inequality 92 Structural-Functional Analysis: The Importance of Culture 92 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Personal Meaning of Race 93 Social-Conflict Analysis: The Structure of Inequality 93

Politics, Race, and Ethnicity: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 94

The Far Right and Conservatives: Culture and Effort Matter 94 Liberals: Society and Government Matter 95 The Radical Left: Fundamental Changes Are Needed 96 Going On from Here 96

Defining Solutions 98 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 99

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 100

4 Gender Inequality 102

Constructing the Problem 102

What Is Gender? 104 Patriarchy 104 The Problem of Sexism 106

Gender and Social Institutions 106 Gender and the Family 107 Gender and Education 107 Gender and the Mass Media 108 Gender and Politics 109 Gender and Religion 109 Gender and the Military 110 Gender and Work 112

Gender Stratification 114 Income 114 Housework 116 Violence against Women 117 Sexual Harassment 118 Sexuality, Beauty, and Reproduction 119 Women: A Majority Minority? 120

Theories of Gender Inequality 120 Structural-Functional Analysis: Gender and Complementarity 120 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Gender in Everyday Life 121 Social-Conflict Analysis: Gender and Inequality 122 Intersection Theory: The Case of Minority Women 123

Feminism 123 Feminist Foundations 124 Types of Feminism 124

A Defining Moment: Elizabeth Cady Stanton: Claiming Women’s Right to Equality 125

Politics and Gender: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 128

Conservatives: The Value of Families 128 Liberals: The Pursuit of Equality 128 The Radical Left: Change the System 129 Going On from Here 130

Defining Solutions 132 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 133

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 134

5 Sexuality and Inequality 136

Constructing the Problem 136

What Is Sex? 139 Sex: A Biological Issue 139 Sex: A Cultural Issue 139

Sexual Attitudes in the United States 140

A Defining Moment: Alfred Kinsey: Talking Openly About Sex 140

The Sexual Revolution 141 The Sexual Counterrevolution 141 The Continuing Sexual Revolution: Older People 142

Sexual Orientation 142 Homosexuality 142 What Determines Sexual Orientation? 143 Homosexuality, Inequality, and Public Policy 145 Same-Sex Marriage 146 The Gay Rights Movement 146 The Transgender Movement 146

Sexuality, Inequality, and Controversy 147 Pornography 147 Sexual Harassment 149 Prostitution 151 Teenage Pregnancy and Parenthood 153

viii Contents

Abortion 154 Sexually Transmitted Infections 156

Theories of Sexuality 159 Structural-Functional Analysis: Controlling Sexuality 160 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining Sexuality 160 Social-Conflict Analysis: Feminist Theory and Queer Theory 161

Politics and Gender: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 163

Conservatives and the Far Right: The Value of Traditional Morality 163 Liberals: Sex and Individual Choice 163 The Radical Left: Go to the Root of the Problem 164 Going On from Here 164

Defining Solutions 166 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 167

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 168

6 Aging and Inequality 170

Constructing the Problem 170

Growing Old 172 Industrialization and Aging 173 Life Expectancy 174

The Graying of the United States 174 Elders: A Diverse Population 175

Problems of Aging 177 Social Isolation 177 Retirement 177 Ageism 178 Victimization of the Elderly 180 The Growing Need for Caregiving 181 Poverty 182 Age Stratification 182 Housing 182 Medical Care 184 Death and Dying 184

A Defining Moment: A Good Death: Cicely Saunders and the Birth of Hospice 187

Theories of Aging and Inequality 187 Structural-Functional Theory: The Need to Disengage 187 Symbolic-Interaction Theory: Staying Active 188 Social-Conflict Theory: Age and Economic Inequality 189 Feminist Theory: Aging and Gender 189 Intersection Theory: Multiple Disadvantages 190

Politics and Aging: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 191

Conservatives: More Family Responsibility 191 Liberals: More Government Assistance 191 The Radical Left: Capitalism and the Elderly 192 Going On from Here 192

Defining Solutions 194 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 195

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 196

PART III Problems of Deviance, Conformity, and Well-Being

7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 198

Constructing the Problem 198

Understanding Crime 200 Norms, Law, and Crime 201 Crime Statistics 201 Violent Crime: Patterns and Trends 202 Property Crime: Patterns and Trends 203 “Street Crime”: Who Are the Criminals? 205

Other Dimensions of the Crime Problem 207 Juvenile Delinquency 207 Hate Crimes 207 White-Collar Crime 208 Corporate Crime 208 Organized Crime 209 Victimless Crime 209

Violence 210 Is Violence a Social Problem? 210 Serious Violence: Mass Murder and Serial Killings 211

A Defining Moment: U.S. Society Discovers Child Abuse 212

The Mass Media and Violence 213 Poverty and Violence 214 Youth Gangs and Violence 214 Drugs and Violence 215 Guns and Violence 215

The Criminal Justice System 218 Due Process 218 Police 218 Courts 219 Punishment 219 Community-Based Corrections 222

Explaining Crime: Biological and Psychological Theories 223

Biological Causes 223 Psychological Causes 225

Explaining Crime: Sociological Theories 226 Structural-Functional Analysis: Why Society Creates Crime 226 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Socially Constructing Reality 228 Social-Conflict Analysis: Crime and Inequality 229 Feminist Analysis: Crime and Gender 230

Politics and Crime: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 231

The Far Right: Crime and National Decline 231

Contents ix

Conservatives: Crime, Violence, and Morality 231 Liberals: Crime, Violence, and Jobs 231 The Radical Left: Crime and Inequality 232 Going On from Here 233

Defining Solutions 234 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 235

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 236

8 Alcohol and Other Drugs 238

Constructing the Problem 238

What Is a Drug? 240 Drugs and Culture 241 Drugs, Race, and Ethnicity 241 Changing Views of Alcohol 242

The Extent of Drug Use 242 Why Do People Use Drugs? 243 Use and Abuse 244 Addiction and Dependency 244

Types of Drugs 244 Stimulants 244 Depressants 247 Hallucinogens 249 Cannabis 250 Steroids 250 Prescription Drugs 251

Drugs and Other Social Problems 251 Problems of Family Life 251 Homelessness 252 Health Problems 252 Crime 253 Global Poverty 253 Terrorism 254

Social Policy: Responding to the Drug Problem 254 Strategies to Control Drugs 254

A Defining Moment: Bill Wilson: Alcoholics Can Learn to Be Sober 256

The War on Drugs 256 A New Initiative: Decriminalization 258

Theories of Drug-Related Social Problems 262 Structural-Functional Analysis: Regulating Drug Use 262 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Meaning of Drug Use 263 Social-Conflict Analysis: Power and Drug Use 263

Politics and Gender: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 264

Conservatives: Just Say No 265 Liberals: Reform Society 265 Radicals: Understanding Drugs from the Margins of Society 265 Going On from Here 266

Defining Solutions 268 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 269

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 270

9 Physical and Mental Health 272

Constructing the Problem 272

Health and Illness: A Global Perspective 274 High-Income Nations 275 Low-Income Nations 275 Rich and Poor Compared: The AIDS Epidemic 275

Health Policy: Paying for Care 277 Socialist Systems 277 Capitalist Systems 278

Health Care in the United States: A System in Crisis? 280 The Cost Problem 281 Who Pays? 282 The Coverage Problem 283 The 2010 Health Care Law 283 Health: Class, Ethnicity, and Race 284 Health: Rural and Urban Places 285 Health: The Importance of Gender 285 People with Disabilities 286 The Nursing Shortage 287

Mental Health and Illness 288 Types of Mental Disorders 289 Mental Illness: A Myth? 289 Mental Illness: Class, Race, and Gender 289 Treatment Strategies 290

A Defining Moment: Dorothea Dix: Mentally Ill People Deserve Our Help 291

Mental Illness on Campus 292

Theories of Health and Illness 293 Structural-Functional Analysis: Health and Social Roles 293 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Meaning of Health 293 Social-Conflict Analysis: Health and Inequality 294 Feminist Analysis: Health and Gender 294

Politics and Health: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 295

Conservatives and the Far Right: Free Markets Provide the Best Care 295 Liberals: Government Must Ensure Universal Care 296 The Radical Left: Capitalism Is Unhealthy 297 Going On from Here 297

Defining Solutions 298 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 299

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 300

PART IV Problems of Social Institutions

10 Social Media 302

Constructing the Problem 302

What Is the Media? 304 Mass Media 304 Social Media 305

x Contents

Apps 306

A Defining Moment: The Birth of the Internet 307

Issues and Controversies Involving Media 307 Media and the Message 308 Media Shaping Reality 309 Media Bias 309 Media Literacy 310 The Digital Divide 310

Social Media: Problems for Individuals 312 Social Media and the Presentation of Self 312 Social Media and Empathy 313 Social Media and Conformity 314 Social Media, Multitasking, and Attention Span 314 CyberBullying 314 Social Media and Depression 314 Social Media and Addiction 315

Social Media: Problems for Relationships 316 Social Media and the Changing Importance of Physical Location 316 Social Media and Parenting 317 Social Media and Predators 317 Social Media and Dating 317

Social Media: Problems for Society 318 Social Media and Culture 319 Social Media and Work 320 Social Media and Politics 320 Social Media and Problems Involving Information 321

Theories of Social Media 322 Structural-Functional Theory: The Functions of Social Media 322 Symbolic-Interaction Theory: Social Media and Reality Construction 323 Social-Conflict Theory: Social Media and Inequality 323 Feminist Theory: Social Media and Gender 324

Politics and the Media: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 325

Conservatives: Honoring Tradition 325 Liberals: Supporting a Progressive Agenda 326 The Radical Left: Media as Big Business 326 Going On from Here 326

Defining Solutions 328 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 329

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 330

11 Economy and Politics 332

Constructing the Problem 332

Economic Systems: Defining Justice, Defining Problems 335 The Capitalist Model 335 The Socialist Model 335 Mixed Systems 336

The Economy and Politics 338 Democracy 338

A Defining Moment: Store Wars: Is Walmart the Problem or the Solution? 339

Authoritarianism and Monarchy 340

Problems of the U.S. Political Economy 340 The Power of Corporations 340 Monopoly and Oligopoly 341 Conglomerates and Other Linkages 342 The Power of Money 343 Campaign Financing 343 Voter Apathy 344 Who Votes? Class, Age, Race, Ethnicity, and Gender 346 The Gender Gap: Seeing Problems Differently 347 Voting Laws for Persons Convicted of Serious Crimes 347 Social Movements: How Much Change? 348

Theories of Economic and Political Problems 348 Structural-Functional Analysis: Rule by the Many 348 Social-Conflict Analysis: Rule by the Few 349

Politics and the Economy: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 351

The Far Right: Make America Great Again 351 Conservatives: The System Is Working 351 Liberals: The Need for Reform 352 The Radical Left: Call for Basic Change 352 Going On from Here 353

Defining Solutions 356 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 357

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 358

12 Work and the Workplace 360

Constructing the Problem 360

Structural Changes in the U.S. Economy 362 The Industrial Revolution 363 The Information Revolution 364 Deindustrialization 364 Globalization 365

Other Problems of the U.S. Workplace 365 The Dual Labor Market 365 Danger to Workers 366 Workplace Alienation 368 McDonaldization and “McJobs” 369 The Temping of the Workplace 369 The Gig Economy 370 Unemployment 370 The Problem of “Missing Workers” 371 The “Low-Wage Recovery” 372 Race, Ethnicity, and Gender 372 Workplace Segregation 373 Labor Unions 373

A Defining Moment: Eugene Debs: Standing Up for the Union 376

New Information Technology: The Brave New Workplace 377

The Home as Workplace 378

Contents xi

Workplace Isolation 378 Workplace Supervision 378 The “Deskilling” of Workers 378

Theories of Work and Work-Related Problems 379 Structural-Functional Analysis: Finding a New Equilibrium 379 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Meaning of Work 380 Social-Conflict Analysis: Work and Inequality 381 Feminist Analysis: Work and Gender 381

Politics and the Workplace: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 382

Conservatives: Look to the Market 382 Liberals: Look to Government 383 The Radical Left: Basic Change is Needed 384 Going On from Here 384

Defining Solutions 386 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 387

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 388

13 Family Life 390

Constructing the Problem 390

What Is a Family? 392 Debate over Definitions 393 A Sociological Approach to Family Problems 393

Family Life: Changes and Controversies 393 Living Together: Do We Need to Marry? 394 Postponing Marriage 394 Parenting: Is One Parent Enough? 395 Families, Race, and Poverty 395 Conflict between Work and Family Life 397 Child Care 397 Divorce 398 Child Support 401 Remarriage: Problems of Blended Families 401 Gay and Lesbian Families 402

A Defining Moment: Same-Sex Marriage: The Massachusetts Decision 402

Brave New Families: High-Tech Reproduction 404

Theories of Families and Family Problems 405 Structural-Functional Analysis: Family as Foundation 405 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Family and Learning 406 Social-Conflict Analysis: Family and Social Class 406 Feminist Analysis: Family and Gender 407

Politics and Family Life: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 408

Conservatives: Traditional “Family Values” 408 Liberals: Many Types of Families 409 The Radical Left: Replace the Family 409 Going On from Here 410

Defining Solutions 412 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 413

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 414

14 Education 416

Constructing the Problem 416

Problems of Education: A Global Perspective 418 Low-Income Countries: Too Little Schooling 419 High-Income Countries: Unequal Schooling 420 Education in U.S. History 421

Problems with U.S. Education 422 The Academic Performance of U.S. Schools 422 Academic Performance: Race, Class, and Gender 422 The Effects of Home and School 422 Dropping Out 423 Functional Illiteracy 424 School Segregation and Busing 424

A Defining Moment: Linda Brown: Fighting to Desegregate the Schools 425

School Funding 426 Tracking 427 Gender Inequality 428 Immigration: Increasing Diversity 429 Schooling People with Disabilities 429 Finding Enough Teachers 430 School Violence 431

Theories of Education and Education-Related Problems 432 Structural-Functional Analysis: The Functions of Schooling 432 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Labels in the Schools 433 Social-Conflict Analysis: Schooling and Inequality 433 Feminist Analysis: Schooling and Gender 434

Politics and Education: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 435

Conservatives: Increase Competition 435 Liberals: Increase the Investment 436 The Radical Left: Attack Structural Inequality 438 Going On from Here 438

Defining Solutions 440 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 441

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 442

15 Urban Life 444 Constructing the Problem 444

Cities: Then and Now 447 Colonial Villages: 1565–1800 447 Westward Expansion: 1800–1860 447 The Industrial Metropolis: 1860–1950 448 Postindustrial Cities and Suburbs: 1950–Present 448

Problems of Today’s Cities 449 Fiscal Problems of the 1970s 449 The Postindustrial Revival 449 The Recent Recession and New Fiscal Problems 450 Urban Sprawl 450 Edge Cities 451 Poverty 451 Housing Problems 453

xii Contents

A Defining Moment: Jacob Riis: Revealing the Misery of the Tenements 454

Racial Segregation 455 Homelessness 455 Snowbelt and Sunbelt Cities 457 Cities in Poor Countries 458

Theories of Urbanization and Urban Problems 458 Structural-Functional Analysis: A Theory of Urbanism 458 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Experiencing the City 460 Social-Conflict Analysis: Cities and Inequality 461

Politics and Urban Life: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 462

Conservatives: The Market and Morality 462 Liberals: Government Reform 464 The Radical Left: The Need for Basic Change 464 Going On from Here 465

Defining Solutions 466 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 467

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 468

PART V Global Problems

16 Population and Global Inequality 470

Constructing the Problem 470

Global Population Increase 472 Population by the Numbers 473 Causes of Population Increase 473 Measuring Population Increase 475 The Low-Growth North 476 The High-Growth South 477 The Social Standing of Women 477 Explaining the Population Problem: Malthusian Theory 477

A Defining Moment: Thomas Robert Malthus: Claiming Population Is a Problem 478

A More Recent Approach: Demographic Transition Theory 479

Global Inequality 479 High-Income Nations 480 Middle-Income Nations 481 Low-Income Nations 481 The World’s Poverty Problem 481 Poverty and Children 483 Poverty and Women 483 Slavery 483

Theories of Global Inequality 484 Structural-Functional Analysis: The Process of Modernization 484 Social-Conflict Analysis: The Global Economic System 486

Politics and Global Inequality: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 489

Conservatives: The Power of the Market 489

Liberals: Governments Must Act 490 The Radical Left: End Global Capitalism 491 Going On from Here 491

Defining Solutions 494 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 495

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 496

17 Technology and the Environment 498

Constructing the Problem 498

Ecology: Studying the Natural Environment 500 The Role of Sociology 501 The Global Dimension 501 Population Increase 501 Poverty and Affluence 502 Technology 502 Cultural Patterns: Growth and Limits 503

Environmental Problems 505

A Defining Moment: Rachel Carson: Sounding an Environmental Wake-Up Call 505

Solid Waste: The Disposable Society 506 Preserving Clean Water 507 Air Pollution 508 Acid Rain 509 The Disappearing Rain Forests 510 Climate Change 510 Declining Biodiversity 511

Theories of the Environment and Environmental Problems 512

Structural-Functional Analysis: Highlighting Connections 512 Social-Conflict Analysis: Highlighting Inequality 512

Politics and the Environment: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 514

Conservatives: Grounds for Optimism 514 Liberals: Grounds for Concern 515 The Radical Left: Grounds for Fundamental Change 515 Going On from Here 516

Defining Solutions 518 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 519

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 520

18 War and Terrorism 522

Constructing the Problem 522

War and Peace: Basic Definitions 524 The Increasing Destruction of War 525 The Causes of War 525 The Economic Costs of Militarism 527 The Economic Costs of War 527 The Human Costs of War 527 Social Class and the Military 529 Mass Media and War 530 War in the Nuclear Age 531 Strategies for Peace 532

Contents xiii

Terrorism 533

A Defining Moment: Mohandas Gandhi: Sending a Message of Peace 534

The Extent of Terrorism 535 The Costs of Terrorism 536 Terrorism as a Type of War 536 Strategies for Dealing with Terrorism 536

Theories of War and Terrorism 538 Biological Theories of Conflict 538 Structural-Functional Analysis: The Functions of Conflict 538 Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Meanings of Conflict 539 Social-Conflict Analysis: Inequality and Conflict 540

Politics and War: Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 540

The Far Right and Conservatives: Peace through Strength 541 Liberals: The Dangers of Militarism 542 The Radical Left: Peace through Equality 542 Going On from Here 542

Defining Solutions 544 Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 545

Making the Grade: Chapter Summary 546

Glossary 548

References 553

Name Index 586

Subject Index 588

Revel™ This title is available as part of the Revel program. Revel is the new and powerful digital learning experience.

Compared to a bound book, Revel offers a number of clear advantages.

Interactivity. Bound books encourage passive reading. Revel transforms graphs and maps into interactive learn- ing exercises that spark curiosity and encourage active en- gagement.

Accessibility. Bound books come in a single format. Revel allows readers to adjust font size according to their own preferences, alternative text for images and screen reader compatibility are available for students with visual impair- ments, and full audio presentation is available to those who prefer sound to visual access.

Available on all devices. Revel is available on your desktop or laptop and can be used on your tablet or smartphone— both iOS and Android devices—through the free Revel app. The Revel app also allows for offline access so you can read even if you don’t always have a data connection.

Integration. Pearson provides Blackboard Learn™, Canvas™, Brightspace by D2L, and Moodle integration, giving institutions, instructors, and students easy access to Revel. Our Revel integration delivers streamlined access to everything your students need for the course in these learning management system (LMS) environments.

Single Sign-on. With single sign-on, students are ready on their first day. From your LMS course, students have easy access to an interactive blend of author’s narrative, media, and assessment.

Grade Sync. Flexible, on-demand grade synchroniza- tion capabilities allow you to control exactly which Revel grades should be transferred to the LMS gradebook.

Greater currency. Because electronic delivery allows in- stant updating, the content of Revel is not static but will be updated by the author over the course of an edition.

New chapter on social media. The new edition contains the first social media chapter to be found in a social prob- lems title.

Total updating of all data and research. There are more than one thousand statistics in Social Problems. In the Eighth Edition, each one is new and represents the latest available data. More than five hundred new research citations sup- port descriptions and analysis in this revision.

Major revision to the chapter on sexuality. The Seventh Edition’s “Sexuality” chapter is now a new chapter called “Sexuality and Inequality,” which has been moved to Part II and deals with social inequality. The chapter now has a focus not only on the diversity of sexual identity in our so- ciety but also how sexuality is linked to social stratification.

New topics plus the latest examples and illustrations. The new edition provides students with the latest on sexual ha- rassment, including the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements; the extent of gun violence, including school shootings; the rise and significance of the alt-right in U.S. politics; the con- tinuing trend toward greater economic inequality; the in- creasing number of women in political office; recent changes to laws and public attitudes about marijuana use; the ex- panding opioid crisis; the expansion of the gig economy; the state of same-sex marriage around the world; how the Trump administration has reacted to global warming; and the latest trends in global conflict, including war and terrorism. This revision includes discussion of the 2016 presidential election and its consequences, including immigration policy, the 2017 changes to the tax law, and the 2018 midterm elections.

New “Understanding the Other” interactive learning exercises. These five interactive exercises, written by John Macionis, are unique to this social problems title. The five exercises, based on recent research, present real-life, ev- eryday situations in which race, class, gender, and sexual identity have profound—and often unrecognized—effects on social outcomes. As students see the world through the eyes of others, they come to understand the power of soci- ety to confer disadvantage as well as privilege on catego- ries of people.

What’s New in Social Problems, Eighth Edition

xiv

What’s New in Social Problems, Eighth Edition xv

Additional content. Revel provides content not available in a bound book, including special graphics, primary read- ings, engaging videos, thought-provoking journaling exer- cises, engaging surveys, and interactive assessment with results reported directly to faculty.

Lower cost. Revel is available to students at less than half the cost of a new bound book. Learn more about Revel at http://www.pearsonhigher-education/com/revel/.

Boxes

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN FOCUS Increasing Economic Inequality: When Does It Become a Problem? 37

Let Them Stay or Make Them Go? The Debate over Unauthorized Immigrants 76

Sex Discrimination in the Workplace: The Hooters Controversy 113

Gather Around the Radio: How Roosevelt’s Fireside Chats Saved the Nation 321

Corporate Welfare: Government Handouts for Big Business 341

Should You Prepare a Premarital Agreement? 400

Increasing Population: A Success Story or the Greatest Crisis? 492

Getting Right with the Environment: How about You? 517

Has Our All-Volunteer Army Turned into a Warrior Caste? 530

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE The Global Village: Problems around the World 13

Sweden Tries to Take Gender Out of the Classroom 107

Female Genital Mutilation: Using Violence to Control Women 119

Prostitutes and Johns in Sweden: Who Is Breaking the Law? 151

Children and Sex Tourism 152

Will the Golden Years Lose Their Glow? Growing Old in Japan 174

Organized Crime: All over the World 210

The Social Roots of AIDS: Poverty, Culture, and Gender 279

Sweatshop Safety: How Much Is a Life Worth? 488

Turning the Tide: Reclaiming Solid Waste in Egypt 507

DIVERSITY: RACE, CLASS, & GENDER The United States: A Land of Poor Children 44

Beauty: What’s It Really About? 120

Female, Male, or Something Else? The Muxes of Mexico 144

Reality Check: Five False Stereotypes about African American Families 396

The “Savage Inequalities” of Schooling in the United States 427

Women, Power, and Contraception: The Key to Controlling Population 475

Women in the Military: An Equal Right to Kill? 539

SOCIAL POLICY C. Wright Mills: Turning Personal Troubles into Social Issues 5

An Undeserved Handout? The Truth about “Welfare” 50

Nursing Home Abuse: What Should Be Done? 181

The Death Penalty: Problem or Solution? 224

The Drug Wars: Safer Streets or Police State? 258

Who Favors “Big Government”? Almost Everybody! 353

Low-Wage Jobs: On (Not) Getting By in America 366

More Than Just Talk: The Politics of Bilingual Education 430

When Work Disappears: Can We Rescue the Inner City? 452

PERSONAL STORIES The Reality of Poverty: Living on the Edge 42

After the Children: Getting Back in the Game 116

Is Aging a Disease? 179

Stalking: The Construction of a Problem 204

Dying for Attention: One Student’s Story 246

Deinstitutionalization: When Good Intentions Have Bad Results 292 School Choice: One Family’s View 437

xvi

Maps

ANTARCTICA

30° 30°

30°

0°30° 30°60°90°

120°150°

60° 90° 120° 150°

30°

0° 0°

EUROPE

20°20° 40°

60°

40°

0°

Women’s Social Standing

High

Above average

Average

Below average

Low

No data

Saeeda Jan, age 20, lives in Afghanistan, a low-income nation that limits the rights and opportunities of women.

Area of inset

West Bank

Puerto Rico (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

ICELAND

SPAIN

NORWAY

IRELAND

UNITED KINGDOM

DENMARK

POLANDGERMANY NETH.

BEL.

LUX. AUS.

CZECH REP.

PORTUGAL

SWITZ.

ITALY

FRANCE SLO. CROATIA

BOS. & HERZ.

FINLANDSWEDEN

ROMANIA HUNG.

SERBIA

SLVK.

ESTONIA

LATVIA LITHUANIA

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

BELARUS

ALB.

BULGARIA MAC.

GREECE

MONT. KOS.

RUSSIA

TURKEY

MALTA CYPRUS

MONGOLIA

CUBA

DOM. REP.

GUATEMALA EL SALVADOR

BELIZE

HONDURAS

COSTA RICA PANAMA

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

VENEZUELA NICARAGUA

HAITIJAMAICA

ECUADOR

PARAGUAY

ARGENTINA URUGUAY

PERU

GUYANA

CHILE

BAHAMAS

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA DOMINICA ST. LUCIA BARBADOSGRENADA

U.S.

U.S.

ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES

ST. KITTS & NEVIS

KAZAKHSTAN

BRAZIL

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

UNITED STATES

CANADA

Hong Kong

Macao Taiwan

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

SOLOMON ISLANDS

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

TIMOR-LESTE

VANUATU

PALAU

KIRIBATI

MARSHALL ISLANDS

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

NAURU

KYRGYZSTAN

CHINA

BHUTAN

TAJIKISTAN

I N D O N E S I A

SRI LANKA

PHILIPPINES

MAURITIUS

LESOTHO SWAZILAND

MOZAMBIQUE

MALDIVES

SEYCHELLES

COMOROS

SAO TOME & PRINCIPE

REP. OF THE CONGO

EQ. GUINEACÔTE D’IVOIRE TOGO

GAMBIA GUINEA-BISSAU

GUINEA SIERRA LEONE

LIBERIA

CAPE VERDE

LIBYAALGERIA

SYRIA

DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

PAKISTAN

MYANMAR (BURMA)

Singapore

OMAN

NEPAL

IRAN

MALAYSIA BRUNEI

CAMBODIA

VIETNAM

INDIA

BANGLADESH LAOS

THAILAND

MADAGASCAR

SOUTH AFRICA

NAMIBIA BOTSWANA

ZIMBABWE

ZAMBIA MALAWI

TANZANIA BURUNDI

KENYA

ANGOLA

GABON

UGANDA CAM.

CENT. AFR. REP. ETHIOPIA

DJIBOUTI SUDANCHAD

KUWAIT

NIGER

BENIN

MALI SENEGAL

BURKINA FASO

NIGERIA GHANA

SAUDI ARABIA

EGYPT U.A.E.

JORDAN

IRAQ

BAHRAIN QATAR

ISRAEL LEBANON

AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA

TUNISIA

RWANDA

ERITREA YEMEN

S. SUDAN

SURINAME

AUSTRALIA

I N D O N E S I A

SOMALIA

MEXICO

MOROCCO

MAURITANIA

Western Sahara (Mor.)

JAPAN SOUTH KOREA

NORTH KOREA

Greenland (Den.)

RUSSIA

GEORGIA

Astrid Brügger, age 19, lives in Norway; like most girls growing up in high-income nations, she enjoys most of the rights and opportunities available to men.

SOURCE: Data from United Nations Development Programme (2015).

GLOBAL MAPS: Window on the World 1–1 Women’s Childbearing in Global Perspective 14

4–1 Women’s Power in Global Perspective 105

4–2 Female Genital Mutilation in Global Perspective 118

5–1 HIV Infections in Global Perspective 158

7–1 Capital Punishment in Global Perspective 222

9–1 Infant Mortality in Global Perspective 276

10–1 Internet Use in Global Perspective 311

11–1 Economic Freedom in Global Perspective 337

12–1 Service-Sector Employment in Global Perspective 364

13–1 Legal Same-Sex Marriage and Registered Partnerships in Global Perspective 403

14–1 Illiteracy in Global Perspective 420

15–1 Urbanization in Global Perspective 459

16–1 Population Growth in Global Perspective 476

16–2 Economic Development in Global Perspective 482

17–1 Energy Consumption in Global Perspective 503

18–1 Peace in Global Perspective, 2017 526

18–2 Nuclear Weapons in Global Perspective 532

xvii

xviii Maps

Percentage of Population below the Poverty Level, 2014

32.6 and over

24.7% to 32.5%

19.6% to 24.6%

14.7% to 19.5%

11.1% to 14.6%

11.0% and under

U.S. average: 15.9%

Anna Mae Peters lives in Nitta Yuma, Mississippi. Almost everyone she knows lives below the government’s poverty line.

Julie Garland lives in Greenwich, Connecticut, where people have very high income and there is little evidence of poverty.

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA

NORTH DAKOTA

MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

LOUISIANA

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

WEST VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

UTAH

HAWAII

D.C.

ALASKA

NATIONAL MAPS: Seeing Ourselves 2–1 Poverty across the United States 45

3–1 Language Diversity across the United States 78

3–2 The Concentration of Hispanics/Latinos, African Americans, Asian Americans, and Arab Americans, by County 84

4–1 Women’s Political Power across the United States 110

4–2 The Earnings Gender Gap across the United States 115

5–1 Teenage Pregnancy Rates across the United States 155

6–1 The Elderly Population across the United States 176

7–1 Who’s Packin’? Concealed Weapon Laws across the United States 217

7–2 Inmates on Death Row across the United States 225

8–1 Marijuana Laws across the United States 259

9–1 Life Expectancy across the United States 284

10–1 Internet Access across the United States 312

11–1 Voter Turnout across the United States 345

12–1 “Right to Work” Laws across the United States 377

13–1 Divorce across the United States, 2016 399

14–1 Public School Teachers’ Pay across the United States 431

15–1 Foreclosures across the United States, 2008 447

15–2 Population Change across the United States, 2000–2010 457

17–1 Risk of Cancer from Air Pollution across the United States 509

SOURCE: US Census Bureau, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) Program 2017.

Our nation’s Pledge of Allegiance ends with the words “… with liberty and justice for all.” This statement may reflect our collective hope, but

does it describe our reality? Certainly, some categories of the population (the rich, men, white people, heterosex- ual people) have greater freedom than others (the poor; women; people of color; homosexual, bisexual, and trans- gender people). Then, too, a large share of this country’s population has serious questions about the extent of so- cial justice, especially in the Trump era. We are living in a time of political division and widespread frustration: Two-thirds of all U.S. adults say that the country is “on the wrong track.” Globally, armed conflict and terrorism threaten the planet’s peace, and there is increasing concern about the state of the natural environment and the future consequences of global warming. Clearly, this is a time when we need to understand more about social problems.

Facts, Theory, and Politics Sociology offers a path to understanding the problems that we face in today’s world. Sociology is also a path to change. Our discipline extends an invitation to action—to become involved in the political debates and movements that are reshaping society. As the leading title for this course, Social Problems, Eighth Edition, offers a broad inves- tigation of social problems, both domestic and global. This title provides all the facts, highlighting historical trends and explaining today’s social controversies. We build this understanding using sociological theory, which ties facts to- gether to create meaning and deepen insight.

Just as important, this title stands alone by providing readers with political analysis. As a source of understanding and a call to action, politics matters. Where a person or a society stands on the political spectrum shapes what issues are de- fined as social problems. Just as important, political position also shapes what policies are defined as solutions. Becoming a good citizen depends on learning about various issues and also gaining fluency in politics so that one can decide which positions are worth supporting and which are worth resisting.

Social Problems, Eighth Edition, not only urges people to become involved, but it also explains what politics is all about. From the first chapter to the last, this title explains the attitudes and values that define various positions on the political spectrum. Social Problems applies these polit- ical points of view to dozens of issues—from increasing economic inequality to terrorism—so that students under- stand today’s debates and are able to develop and defend political positions for themselves.

A guiding principle of this text is that politics involves competing points of view. Social Problems presents diverse political viewpoints for four reasons. First, all points of view are part of the political debate that goes on across the United States. Second, no one can hold personal political beliefs with any conviction without understanding the ar- guments of those who disagree. In other words, to be, say, a good liberal, one needs to understand not just progres- sive politics but conservative, far-right, and radical-left positions as well. Third, while anyone is likely to favor one political position over others, most of us can find, in all the political positions, at least some element of truth. In the political arena, as in the classroom, reasonable people can and do disagree. Understanding all positions is a major step toward reducing our nation’s angry political divide and, in its place, promoting civil and respectful discourse. Fourth, and finally, by being inclusive, Social Problems in- vites all students to share their ideas, which encourages more lively class discussion.

The Social-Constructionist Approach The most important reason to put the politics in when teaching a social problems course is to understand how politics guides the process of defining and responding to social problems. This title differs from all others in that it does not adopt one (implicit or explicit) political point of view by presenting a series of “problems” and identifying a sequence of “solutions” as if everyone agreed about what these are. Rather, all chapters highlight the importance of political attitudes in the selection of some issues and not others as problems, as well as in the favoring of certain polices as solutions. With this fact in mind, we can under- stand why people disagree about what the problems and their solutions are. Indeed, one person’s problem may well be another’s solution. From this insight, true conversation can begin.

Another benefit of using a social-constructionist ap- proach is recognizing how and why our society came to recognize a problem at a certain point in our history, often as a result of claims made by social movements. For exam- ple, the behaviors we now call child abuse, environmental racism, and sexual harassment may always have been with us, but our society did not always define these as prob- lems. On the contrary, problems came into being only after courageous individuals sparked successful social move- ments that brought about change both in our hearts and, more importantly, in our laws.

Preface

xix

xx Preface

2016 presidential election. New data provide the latest on the social standing of various racial and ethnic categories of the U.S. population. A new Understanding the Other in- teractive exercise, “Traffic Stops by Police: The Difference Race Makes,” provides a data-driven analysis of racial bias on the streets. Twenty-one new research citations inform the revised chapter.

Chapter 4: Gender Inequality New data track the in- creasing number of women in Congress between 1918 and 2018. Updates include analysis of women’s roles in recent films, contrast the power of women in relation to men in nations around the world, report the share of women in the U.S. labor force, indicate the share of degrees earned by U.S. women, identify the most sex-segregated occupations, track the pay gap between women and men, and indicate the share of women in the U.S. military. There is expanded discussion of gender, housework, and child rearing. The coverage of sexual harassment has been updated and ex- panded to include the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements. New discussion traces the rising power of feminism in the United States since the 2016 presidential election. The revised chapter is informed by thirty-two new research citations.

Chapter 5: Sexuality and Inequality This chapter has been moved to a new position and recast to focus on how sexuality is linked to social stratification. The chapter- opening story highlights the national attention now directed at sexual harassment. Coverage of the transgen- der movement has been greatly expanded. The discussion of teenage pregnancy has been updated and expanded to include teenage parenthood. Attention is given to Trump administration efforts to limit access to abortion. Updates include the latest on violence directed against LGBTQ people, the extent of homosexual and bisexual identity, the extent of same-sex marriage worldwide, the extent of pornography use in the United States, patterns of arrest and the extent of public support for prostitution, the rate of births to teenage women in nations around the world, the extent of abortion in the United States, public attitudes about abortion under various circumstances, the extent of sexually transmitted infections (STIs), and new national and global data on HIV and AIDS. There is a new Under- standing the Other interactive exercise called “Jobs and Income: The Hidden Injuries of Transgender Workers.” There are thirty-four new research citations in this revised chapter.

Chapter 6: Aging and Inequality There is updated dis- cussion of euthanasia laws across the United States and in other nations. Attention is given to the effects of Trump administration policies on older people. Find the latest statistical data on the number of seniors in the United States, the increasing average age of retirement, the extent

Your Fully Involved Author John Macionis is personally involved in every element of Social Problems. In addition to keeping the manuscript up to date with the latest research, data, and relevant exam- ples and illustrations, he selects all the photos and other images, writes all the captions, develops all the testing ma- terial, prepares the instructor’s manual, and creates all the interactive content in the Revel electronic version. John corresponds regularly with colleagues and students, which makes Social Problems an always-evolving project. For the latest in the Macionis texts, visit his personal website: www.TheSociologyPage.com or www.macionis.com. Among other things, you will find there a series of new Pow- erPoint presentations, based on current research and free for downloading. A full suite of instructor resources is available from Pearson at www.pearsonhighereducation.com.

What’s New in the Eighth Edition The new edition of Social Problems is different and improved in the following ways:

Chapter 1: Studying Social Problems Find the latest data on the share of the public claiming that this country is on the wrong track. There is new and expanded anal- ysis of the state of U.S. politics in the wake of the 2016 presidential election and the 2018 midterms. Included are the latest survey data identifying what the public thinks are the most serious social problems and the distribution of U.S. adults on the political spectrum. Discussion is supported by inclusion of recent social movements, in- cluding #MeToo and #TimesUp. A new Understanding the Other interactive exercise, “First Day of College: The Invisible Baggage of Class,” explores how social class shapes the experience of being on campus. This revised chapter is supported by twenty-two new research cita- tions.

Chapter 2: Economic Inequality The revised chapter has the latest on the distribution of both income and wealth. New data provide a profile of people in the richest 1 per- cent. Economic data by class, race, and ethnicity have all been updated. The most recent statistics document increasing economic inequality between 1980 and 2016. The discussion of poverty in the United States provides updated analysis by age, race, ethnicity, gender, and re- gion. The changes in the 2017 tax law are discussed. This revised chapter is supported by forty-one new research citations.

Chapter 3: Racial and Ethnic Inequality In the age of Trump, political analysis has been expanded to explain how the alt-right views race, ethnicity, and immigration. New discussion explores immigration policy—including the border wall and the fate of the Dreamers—since the

Preface xxi

Chapter 9: Physical and Mental Health The revised chap- ter has updated and expanded coverage of AIDS around the world; the discussion reflects the increasing share of minorities among people infected with HIV. The profiles of health care systems in the United States and various other nations have all been updated to reflect the latest policies and trends. The chapter highlights changes to the nation’s health care system under the Trump administration. There are new data on longevity in the United States including analysis by race, class, and gender. The chapter reports the share of the U.S. population defined as obese, the share experiencing a mental illness, the link between poverty and illness in the United States and around the world, and trends in infant mortality in the United States and around the world. Find the latest statistics and research on the cost of providing health care in the United States, salaries paid to nurses and physicians in the United States, and patterns of mental health on campus. Thirty-six new research cita- tions inform the revised chapter.

Chapter 10: Social Media This entirely new chapter responds to perhaps the most important development in the last generation—the rise of social media and the rapid expansion of internet-based communication. The chapter briefly traces the rise of mass media and explains its impor- tance for modern societies. Attention then turns to social media, pointing out ways in which it differs from earlier mass media. There is extensive discussion of social net- working sites and other apps.

Problems linked to the media begin with ways in which various media shape the content that they transmit. An issue with special importance in the wake of the 2016 presidential election is media bias and claims of fake news. Discussion highlights what we know about bias in the me- dia and also instructs readers in pursuit of greater media literacy. Analysis of differential access to the internet and social media explains the digital divide both in the United States and around the world.

Individuals use social media to construct a social identity and build self-esteem. Research suggests that use of social media reduces people’s capacity for empathy, encourages conformity, and may reduce attention span. Research links use of social media to the experience of cyber-bullying and also increasing rates of clinical depres- sion. There is mounting evidence to support the conclu- sion that social media may become addictive. Social media also shapes our relationships, including patterns of dating and parenting. Social media is also linked to the problem of online predators.

Social media brings change to popular culture and encourages young people to develop an oversexualized social identity. Social media also bring both positive and negative changes to the workplace, politics, and other institutions.

of elder abuse, living patterns among older people, the in- creasing number of complaints of age discrimination, and income and poverty data contrasting older and younger people. New discussions include the increasing pay gap between older women and men, why older stars such as Meryl Streep and Samuel L. Jackson are the excep- tions rather than the rule in the entertainment business, and a nod to Mick Jagger, who has turned seventy-five. There are thirty-four new research citations in this revised chapter.

Chapter 7: Crime, Violence, and Criminal Jus- tice There is updated and expanded coverage of mass shootings in the United States. Recent global data show that two-thirds of all mass shooting fatalities occur in the United States. There is also expanded discussion of the national debate over guns and deadly violence. Cover- age of hate crimes is also expanded. The chapter reflects changes in marijuana laws right up to 2018. The revised chapter has the latest crime statistics for all major prop- erty and person crimes, new profiles of who is arrested for serious crimes, and arrest data for street crime that are analyzed by age, gender, race and ethnicity, and social class. All the crime statistics show trends over the last half century and provide the latest data for 2016. A National Map provides the most recent laws, state by state, regu- lating gun ownership. The latest data inform the discus- sions of mass incarceration and the death penalty in the United States. Current examples and illustrations include the 2017 automobile murder of an anti-white-supremacy protestor in Charlottesville, the 2018 mass shooting at the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Santa Fe High School, the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, the on- going gang violence crisis in Chicago, and expanding violence linked to the opioid epidemic throughout the United States. Where appropriate, new Trump adminis- tration policies and their consequences are noted. A new Understanding the Other interactive exercise called “On the Street: Do I Look Dangerous to You?” links race to per- ceptions of criminality. Forty-eight new research citations inform the revised chapter.

Chapter 8: Alcohol and Other Drugs There is updat- ed and expanded discussion of the opioid crisis in the United States. New topics include the shifting federal drug policy under the Trump administration. There are updates on a record high in public support for legal mar- ijuana, the latest in state laws permitting marijuana use, changes in European laws regarding marijuana, binge drinking by college students, the share of U.S. adults who define drug use as a social problem, the share of the adult population using various categories of legal and illegal drugs, and the extent of cigarette smoking around the world. Fifty-five new research citations inform this revised chapter.

xxii Preface

Chapter 14: Education The revised chapter has new discussion of the 2018 teachers’ movement for higher sal- aries and greater public investment in education. There is expanded and updated discussion of school violence and coverage of the student movement to end mass murder in schools. There is new discussion of education policy un- der the Trump administration. The revised chapter has up- dates on the educational attainment of the U.S. population and the share of women and men in U.S. higher education. Updated coverage includes educational performance ac- cording to race, class, and gender; rates of illiteracy in the United States and around the world; the global ranking of the United States in measures of academic performance; and the rates of dropping out of school for various catego- ries of the U.S. population. The chapter notes with sadness and respect the death of racial segregation activist Linda Brown. This revised chapter is supported by twenty-six new research citations.

Chapter 15: Urban Life The revised chapter has updates on the extent of racial segregation in U.S. cities, the extent of bankruptcy of U.S. cities, the rate of urban sprawl, the poverty rates for various sectors of urban and rural places, the extent of homelessness in U.S. society, the population shift from snowbelt to sunbelt cities, and the increasing size of cities in developing nations. This revised chapter is supported by seventeen new research citations.

Chapter 16: Population and Global Inequality There is updated and expanded discussion of how women’s social standing is fueling global population increase. There is ex- panded coverage of the importance of gender in patterns of global poverty and also the extent of global poverty among children. The revised chapter provides the latest data for all demographic indicators, including fertility, mortality, and population increase. Find the latest statistics for world population and its rate of increase. There are also the most current data for global inequality with comparisons to na- tional inequality data in the United States. Discussions of global slavery and global sweatshops have been expand- ed and updated. This revised chapter is supported by twenty-nine new research citations.

Chapter 17: Technology and the Environment The re- vised chapter has updated and expanded discussion of the increasing global shortage of fresh water. There is also new and expanded discussion of climate change, including the Trump administration withdrawal from the Paris climate accords. The revised chapter has updates on the upward trend in global carbon emissions, the declining rate of population increase, the environmental consequences of rising global affluence, and the increasing production of solid waste. This revised chapter has the most recent data available and is supported by twenty-six new research citations.

The new chapter highlights the power of social media to advance social movements, including the #MeToo and #TimesUp responses to sexual harassment. The content of this new chapter reflects several dozen recent research citations.

Chapter 11: Economy and Politics The chapter con- tains a new discussion of the rising power of the far right in U.S. politics. There is updated and expanded discussion of Trump administration policies and increasing political po- larization in the United States. There is new and expanded discussion of campaign financing and how money drives U.S. politics. The revised chapter analyzes the role of wom- en voters in the 2016 presidential election. There are up- dates on the level of trust the U.S. public has in government and other national institutions, the extent of political free- dom in nations around the world, the share of the economy represented by government for the United States and oth- er nations, and the size of economic conglomerates in the United States. Also covered is voting turnout in the 2016 elections by age, race, ethnicity, and gender. Twenty-three new research citations support this revised chapter.

Chapter 12: Work and the Workplace A new chapter- opening story describes gender imbalance in the work- force of high-tech companies in the United States. The revised chapter has a new discussion of the gig economy and also describes changes to conditions in the workplace under the Trump administration. There are updates on the unemployment rate, including data by age, gender, and race; the median income for U.S. workers by race, ethnic- ity, and gender; the distribution of U.S. workers in three sectors of the economy; the intersection of race and eth- nicity with the type of jobs people hold; relative wages for workers around the world; the number of workers killed or injured in the workplace; the level of workplace vio- lence; and the current state of labor unions in the United States. There is a new Understanding the Other interactive exercise called “Finding a Job: The Hidden Importance of Race.” This revised chapter is supported by seventeen new research citations.

Chapter 13: Family Life A new chapter-opening story il- lustrates change over time in our cultural definition of the family. Discussion of gay and lesbian families in the Unit- ed States and around the world has been expanded and updated. The revised chapter provides the latest data on trends in marital status, cohabitation, age at first marriage, single parenting, and divorce. The most recent statistics inform analysis of the links between income, poverty, and type of family. International data contrast divorce rates in the United States to rates in other nations. Maps showing divorce across the United States and the legal status of same-sex marriage around the world have been updated. This revised chapter is supported by twenty-two new re- search citations.

Preface xxiii

– Journal assignments at the end of each major sec- tion ask students to apply what they learn to their own lives.

– Where Do You Stand? writing opportunities end- ing each Defining Solutions feature encourage stu- dents to state their own positions on controversial issues and choose policies that support their solu- tions to social problems.

– Shared Writing: Envisioning a Better Society prompts, found at the end of each chapter, encourage students to use what they have learned to imagine how to improve their social world. These exercises can form the basis of lively class discussion.

– Essay prompts are from Pearson’s Writing Space, which allow instructors to assign both automatical- ly graded and instructor-graded prompts. Writing Space is the best way to develop and assess concept mastery and critical thinking through writing. Writ- ing Space provides a single place within Revel to create, track, and grade writing assignments, access writing resources, and exchange meaningful, person- alized feedback quickly and easily to improve writ- ing. Writing Space provides everything students need to complete and track their writing assignments, to access assignment guides and checklists, to write or upload completed assignments, and to receive grades and feedback—all in one convenient place. For ed- ucators, Writing Space makes assigning, receiving, and evaluating writing assignments easy. It’s simple to create new assignments and upload relevant ma- terials, to see student progress, and to receive alerts when students submit work. Writing Space uses customized grading rubrics so students can receive personalized feedback. Writing Space can also check students’ work for improper citation or plagiarism by comparing it against the world’s most accurate text comparison database available from Turnitin.

The Documentary Sociology/Pearson Originals highlight stories that bring sociological concepts and today’s politi- cal controversies to life. These outstanding videos connect students with the problems, politics, and controversies of today’s world.

Supplements Make more time for your students by using instructor re- sources that offer effective learning assessments and in- crease classroom engagement. Pearson’s partnership with educators does not end with the delivery of course materi- als; Pearson is there with you on the first day of class and beyond. A dedicated team of local Pearson representatives will work with you to not only choose course materials but also integrate them into your class and assess their

Chapter 18: War and Terrorism This revised chapter has updates on the “doomsday clock” indicating the risk of global destruction, the number of active military con- flicts in the world, the loss of life in all U.S. wars, the size of the U.S. military budget, and the number of recent acts of terrorism. Changes in military policy under the Trump administration are also highlighted. The revised chapter is supported by twenty-five new research citations.

Revel for Social Problems Providing educational technology for the way today’s stu- dents read, think, and learn, Revel is an interactive learn- ing environment that offers a fully digital experience. It uses frequent updates of articles and data to illustrate the current state of society. Students can interact with multiple types of media and assessments integrated directly within the author’s narrative:

• Chapter-opening Trending Now features provide arti- cles written by the author that put breaking news and current events into the context of sociology. Examples include the increasing suicide rate in the United States, the record level of racial and ethnic diversity in the Con- gress that opened in 2019, the record level on women in positions of political leadership in 2019, Trump ad- ministration efforts to define sex in binary terms, recent mass shootings and the debate over gun control, the controversy over vaping, concerns about addiction to social media, the increasing number of states that have increased the minimum wage, the controversy over separating parents and children on the border, activ- ism among the nation’s public school teachers, and the record loss of life from wild fires in California.

• Understanding the Other interactive learning exercises in five chapters offer data-driven snapshots of day-to- day situations from the perspective of marginalized individuals, providing the opportunity for students to see the world from a new perspective.

• Interactive maps, figures, and tables feature Social Explorer technology, which allows for real-time data updates and rollover information to support the data and show movement over time.

• Chapter Evaluate features include a reflection ques- tion to encourage students to critically assess the in- sights gained from theoretical analysis.

• Assessments tied to primary chapter sections, as well as full chapter exams, allow instructors and students to track progress and get immediate feedback. All as- sessments are written by the author, John Macionis.

• Integrated Writing Opportunities: To help students reason and write more clearly, each chapter offers three varieties of writing prompts:

xxiv Preface

exams can be easily authored and saved online and then printed for classroom use, giving you ultimate flexibility to manage assessments anytime and anywhere. To learn more, visit www.pearsonhighered.com/mytest.

PowerPoint Presentations The Lecture PowerPoint slides follow the chapter outline and feature images from the textbook integrated with the text. Additionally, all of the PowerPoints are uniquely designed to present concepts in a clear and succinct way. They are available to adopters for download from the Pearson Instructors Resource Center at www.pearsonhighered.com/irc.

In order to support varied teaching styles while making it easy to incorporate dynamic Revel features in class, two sets of PowerPoint presentations are available for this edition: (1) A set of accessible lecture PowerPoint slides outlines each chapter of the text. (2) An additional set of the lecture PowerPoint slides includes LiveSlides, which link to each Social Explorer data visualization and interactive map within the Revel product. These presentations are available to adopters in digital formats at the Instructor’s Resource Center (www.pearsonhighered.com/irc) or in the Instruc- tor’s Resources folder within the Revel product.

I offer this new edition of Social Problems in the hope that this new digital age will elevate teaching and learning to a new level of excellence.

As always, please feel free to contact me by email: [email protected]

With my best wishes to my colleagues,

John J. Macionis

effectiveness. Our goal is your goal—to improve the qual- ity of instruction with each semester.

Pearson is pleased to offer the following resources to qual- ified adopters of Macionis’s Social Problems. Several of these supplements are available to instantly download from Revel or on the Instructor Resource Center (IRC); please visit the IRC at www.pearsonhighered.com/irc to register for access.

Instructor’s Manual Create a comprehensive road map for teaching classroom, online, or hybrid courses. John Macionis has prepared this Instructor’s Manual and Test Bank for every chapter in this title. Each chapter in the Instructor’s Manual includes the following resources: Chapter Update; Author’s Note; Chapter Outline; Learning Objectives; Detailed Teach- ing Objectives; John’s Chapter Close-Up; John’s Personal Video Selection; Research for a Cutting-Edge Classroom; Teaching Suggestions, Exercises, and Projects; Revel Features; Essay Questions; and Film and Video List. Designed to save preparation time and to make your lectures more effective, this extensive resource gathers together useful activities and strategies for teaching the Social Problems course. Available within Revel and on the IRC.

Test Bank Also available is a Test Bank of more than 900 multiple-choice and essay questions. You can easily cus- tomize the assessment to work in any major learning man- agement system and to match what is covered in your course. Word, Black-Board, and WebCT versions are avail- able on the IRC, and Respondus versions are available on request from www.respondus.com.

MyTest This powerful assessment generation program in- cludes all of the questions in the Test Bank. Quizzes and

John Macionis recently retired from full-time teaching at Kenyon College in Gambier, Ohio, where he served as Professor and Distinguished Scholar of Sociology. During his long career at Kenyon, he chaired the Sociology De- partment, directed the college’s multidisciplinary program in humane studies, presided over the campus senate, was president of the college’s faculty, and taught sociology to thousands of students. Kenyon recognized his decades of service by awarding him an honorary doctorate of humane letters in 2013.

Professor Macionis has been active in academic pro- grams in other countries, having traveled to some fifty na- tions. He writes, “I am an ambitious traveler, eager to learn and, through the texts, to share much of what I discover with students, many of whom know little about the rest of the world. For me, traveling and writing are all dimen- sions of teaching. First and foremost, I am a teacher—a passion for teaching animates everything I do.”

At Kenyon, Macionis taught a number of courses, but his favorite classes were always Introduction to Sociology and Social Problems. He continues to enjoy contact with students across the United States and around the world.

John works every day on his Pearson titles. In his free time, he enjoys tennis, swimming, hiking, and playing old- ies rock-and-roll. Macionis is an environmental activist in the Lake George region of New York’s Adirondack Moun- tains, working with a number of organizations, including the Lake George Land Conservancy, where he served for more than a decade as president of the board of trustees.

JOHN J. MACIONIS [pronounced ma-SHOW-nis] has been in the classroom teaching sociology for more than forty years. Born and raised in Philadelphia, Pennsyl-

vania, John earned a bachelor’s degree from Cornell Uni- versity and a doctorate in sociology from the University of Pennsylvania.

His publications are wide-ranging, focusing on com- munity life in the United States, interpersonal intimacy in families, effective teaching, humor, new information tech- nology, and the importance of global education.

In addition to authoring this best-seller, Macionis has also written Society: The Basics, the most popular in- troductory title in the field, now in its fifteenth edition. The full-length Macionis introductory title is Sociology, which is now in its seventeenth edition. He collaborates on international editions of these titles: Society: The Basics: Canadian Edition, Sociology: Canadian Edition, and Sociology: A Global Introduction. All the Macionis titles are available for high school students and in various foreign-language editions.

All the texts are now offered in low-cost electronic editions in the Revel program. These exciting learning ma- terials encourage students to read and provide an interac- tive learning experience on a variety of electronic devices. Unlike other authors, John takes personal responsibility for writing all electronic content, just as he authors all the assessment and supplemental materials. John proudly resists the trend toward outsourcing such material to non-sociologists.

In addition, Macionis edited the best-selling anthology Seeing Ourselves: Classic, Contemporary, and Cross-Cultural Readings in Sociology, also available in a Canadian edition. Macionis and Vincent Parrillo have written the leading urban studies text, Cities and Urban Life, currently in a sixth edition.

Follow John on his Facebook author page, John J. Macionis, [author page, John J. Macionis, and find the latest information on all the books. You can also access downloadable teaching material at his website: www. macionis.com or www.TheSociologyPage.com. A full suite of instructor resources is found at the Pearson site: www. pearsonhighered.com.

In 2002, the American Sociological Association presented Macionis with the Award for Distinguished Contributions to Teaching, citing his innovative use of global material as well as the introduction of new teaching technology in his textbooks.

About the Author

xxv

2

1.4 Discuss the methods sociologists use to study social problems.

1.5 Identify factors that shape how societies devise policy to respond to social problems.

1.6 Analyze how political attitudes shape the process of constructing social problems and defining solutions.

1.1 Explain the benefits of learning about sociology and using the sociological imagination.

1.2 Define the concept “social problem” and explain how the people in a society come to define some issues—and not others—as social problems.

1.3 Apply sociological theory to the study of social problems.

Chapter 1

Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Constructing the Problem

Learning Objectives

W ill

ia m

T ho

m as

C ai

n/ S

tr in

ge r/

G et

ty Im

ag es

.

A le

x W

on g/

G et

ty Im

ag es

.

C on

or C

af fr

ey /S

ci en

ce S

ou rc

e.

What turns an issue into a social problem?

Social problems come into being as people define an issue as harmful and in need of change.

Aren’t we always dealing with the same problems?

Most of today’s problems differ from those that concerned the public several generations ago.

Isn’t a social problem any condition that is harmful?

Many conditions harmful to thousands of people are never defined as social problems.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 3

Tracking the Trends

Researchers try to gauge the public’s confidence in the country by asking gen- eral questions such as this one:

“Do you think the country is on the right track or the wrong track?”

In early 2016, 65 percent of U.S. adults said they thought that the country was “on the wrong track,” more than twice the share who thought the country was “going in the right direction.” Back in 2002, just 35 percent of U.S. adults said the country was on the wrong track. In recent years, dissatisfaction with government emerged as the most commonly cited social problem in the United States. Polls taken at the end of 2017 show two-thirds of U.S. adults disapprove of President Trump’s performance in office—further evidence of widespread dissatisfaction with the country’s direction. Do you think the country can continue without the confidence of a majority of the people?

Survey Question: “Do you feel things in this country are generally going in the right direction or do you feel things

have pretty seriously gotten off on the wrong track?”

P er

ce nt

ag e

R es

po nd

in g

0%

2002 Year

20142004 2006 2008 2010 2012

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

2016

“Wrong Track”

“Right Track”

SOURCE: CBS News/New York Times Poll, January 12, 2016.

4 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Chapter Overview This chapter introduces the study of social problems by defining the sociological imagination, explaining sociology’s theoretical approaches, and describing the ways sociologists carry out research. You will learn how people’s political attitudes define the issues they are likely to view as social problems and what policies they are likely to favor as solutions. You will gain the ability to describe the political spectrum and to analyze social issues from various positions on the political spectrum.

Marcos Jorman was already late as he rushed out the door of his apartment. He ran down the stairs, briefcase in hand, and crashed through the old wooden door of the apartment building. He looked north up Chestnut Street. What luck! The bus was right there, just half a block away! Catching his breath, Marcos climbed aboard as the bus pulled out into the heavy traffic. He saw Jan, a neighbor and co-worker, standing in the rear of the bus.

“I just got a text from Sandra,” Jan blurted out, look- ing a little desperate. “She says everyone is getting laid off. We’re all out. The company is shutting down the whole division and moving operations out of the country.” Her head dropped along with her spirit. “What am I going to do? How am I going to manage with my kids?”

Marcos checked his own phone. He, too, had messages— several from co-workers who had already arrived at work and confirmed the bad news. “Oh, man, it’s true,” he said softly. The two stood silently for the rest of the ride.

The day turned out to be one of the toughest in Marcos’s entire life. He knew the start-up company was struggling with rising costs and heavy competition. Only two months earlier, new management had come in to “reorganize” and to cut costs. The decision to close local operations was the result.

As he entered his workstation, he was handed a short letter spelling out the dismissal. He joined dozens of others at a brief meeting with a human relations officer and then went back to pack up his things. He was home again by early afternoon.

Marcos sat in his apartment with a cup of tea looking out the window at nothing in particular. He felt weak, al- most ill. He kept telling himself that we live in a world full of risks. He knew the company was in trouble. But, some- how, he could not shake the idea that the job loss was his own fault, his own personal failure.

This story could be told millions of times because millions of people—including those who work in construc- tion, sales, communications, management, and teaching— lose their jobs every year.

Seeing Patterns: The Sociological Imagination 1.1 Explain the benefits of learning about sociology

and using the sociological imagination.

Living in a society that teaches us to feel personally respon- sible for whatever happens to us—good or bad—we easily understand Marcos’s reaction to being laid off. We imagine Marcos second-guessing himself: Should he have majored in something else? If only he had taken that other job in Atlanta! If only he had listened to his father and stayed in school. We all tend to personalize our lives and blame our- selves for our troubles.

However, when we apply the sociological imagination, a point of view that highlights how society affects the experiences we have and the choices we make, the picture changes. Using the sociological imagination, we see that the operation of U.S. society—including an economy that makes unemployment a normal part of doing business—causes the loss of millions of jobs every year. These losses are far greater in times of eco- nomic recession. For this reason, losing a job can hardly be said to be simply a matter of bad personal choices.Fr

an ck

re po

rt er

/E +/

G et

ty Im

ag es

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 5

By helping us to see the world in a new way, the socio- logical imagination gives us power to bring about change. But a sociological viewpoint can also be a bit disturbing. A course in social problems asks us to face the fact that many people in our communities lose their jobs, become victims of crime, and go to bed hungry through no fault of their own. When the economy turns bad, as it did when a recession began in 2008, tens of millions of people suddenly find that they are unemployed and many of them may still be out of work a decade later. In this richest of nations, even during “good times,” some 45 million people (especially women and children) are poor. The study of social problems helps us see these truths more clearly. It also encourages us to play a part in shaping the future of our nation and the world.

Social Problems: The Basics 1.2 Define the concept “social problem” and explain

how the people in a society come to define some issues—and not others—as social problems.

A social problem is a condition that undermines the well-being of some or all members of a society and is usually a matter of public controversy. In this definition, the term “condition” refers to any situation that at least some people define as troublesome, such as not having a job, having huge college loans, living in fear of crime, being overweight or living in poor health, or worrying about the effects of toxic chemi- cals in our drinking water.

Sociology is the systematic study of human societies. Society refers to people who live within some territory and share many patterns of behavior. As sociologists study society, they pay attention to culture, a way of life including wide- spread values (about what is good and bad), beliefs (about what is true), and behavior (what people do every day).

Cultural patterns in the United States are diverse, but one widely shared value is the importance of individualism, the idea that, for better or worse, people are responsible for their own lives. In the case of Marcos Jorman, it is easy to say, “Well, he lost his job because he decided to sign on with a start-up company in the first place. He really brought this on himself.” In other words, our common sense often defines personal problems—even when the problems affect millions of people—as the result of personal choice. Without denying that individuals do make choices, sociologists point to ways in which society shapes all our lives. Thinking sociologically, we see that widespread unemployment may be a personal problem (especially to people who lose their jobs), but it is also a social issue.

Sociology’s key insight is that many of the personal troubles people face are really social issues with their roots in the operation of the larger society. As the U.S. sociologist C. Wright Mills (1916–1963) explained, using the sociological imagination helps us “kick it up a level” and see how soci- ety shapes our personal lives. The Social Policy box takes a closer look at how sociology can help you do this for yourself.

SOCIAL POLICY

C. Wright Mills: Turning Personal Troubles into Social Issues All of us struggle with our own problems, which might include unemployment, falling into debt, falling out of love, drug or alcohol abuse, poor health, or suffering from violence. We experience these problems; we feel them, sometimes on a gut-wrenching level. Our problems are personal. But C. Wright Mills (1959) claimed that the roots of such “personal” problems lie in society itself, often involving the ways our economic and political systems work. After all, the normal operation of our society favors some categories of people over others: the rich over the poor, white people over people of color, middle-aged people over the very young and the very old. When people see their problems as personal, all they can do is try to deal with their troubles as one individual. Isolating one life in this way keeps people from seeing the bigger picture of how society operates. In the end, as Mills explained, people feel that “their lives are a series of traps. They sense that within their everyday worlds, they cannot overcome their troubles” (1959:3). Because we live in an individualistic culture, we are quick to conclude that the troubles we experience are simply our own fault.

A more accurate and more effective approach is to understand that it is society that shapes our lives. The sociological imagination transforms personal troubles into social issues by showing us that these issues affect not only us but also countless people like us. This knowledge gives us power because, joining with others, we can improve our lives—and break free of our traps—as we set out to change society.

What Do You Think? 1. Provide three examples of personal problems that Mills

would define as social issues.

2. To what extent do you think people in the United States believe that problems such as unemployment result from bad personal choices or even bad luck? Explain.

3. Have you ever taken part in a movement seeking change? What was the movement trying to achieve? What were your reasons for joining?

6 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Washington, D.C., and the election of Donald Trump as president, dissatisfaction with government and political leadership topped the list in 2017. Of course, concern about the economy was still with us in 2017, along with fears about terrorism, immigration, and deep political division across the nation.

Comparing the two lists in the table, we find three issues on both: the economy, unemployment, and dissatis- faction with government. But the other issues are different, showing that the public’s view of social problems changes over time. Terrorism, for example, was not a widespread concern in 1935, although it has become a major issue today. Sometimes, public opinion shifts dramatically even over short periods. In the months after the allegations of sexual assault against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein in 2017, women as well as men across the country mobilized against sexual harassment leading to additional allega- tions against hundreds of important people and millions of women breaking their silence as they joined the #MeToo movement (Chira, 2017; Patel & Miller, 2017).

The Social-Constructionist Approach The fact that over time, people define different issues as social problems points to the importance of the social- constructionist approach, the assertion that social problems arise as people define conditions as undesirable and in need of change. This approach states that social problems have a subjective foundation, reflecting people’s judgments about their world. For example, the public has yet to include obesity on the list of serious social problems, even though health officials say that most adults in the United States are at risk of poor health because they are overweight. This is true despite the objective fact that illness brought on by obesity claims the lives of hundreds of thousands of people in our country each year, which is many times the num- ber of people who die as a result of terrorist attacks or the number of soldiers who were killed in Iraq or Afghanistan.

Figure 1–1 explains the subjective and objective foun- dations of social problems. Box A includes issues—such as homicide—that are objectively very harmful (more than 16,000 people are murdered each year in the United States) and cause widespread concern (polls show that a major- ity of U.S. adults worry about gun violence and want the government to reduce crime) (Pew Research Center, 2016). Box  B includes issues—such as the use of automobiles— that, objectively speaking, cause even greater harm (more than 32,000 people in the United States die each year in auto accidents), and yet hardly anyone sees these issues as social problems. Of course, one reason people overlook the high death toll on our highways is that we can’t imagine our way of life without automobiles. Box C represents issues— such as school shootings—that, objectively speaking, cause relatively limited harm (only a few dozen people have

A condition that “undermines the well-being” hurts people, either by causing them immediate harm or, per- haps, by draining their spirit or limiting their choices. For example, poverty not only deprives people of nutritious food and safe housing, but it also takes away their dignity, leaving them passive and powerless.

Because any issue affects various segments of our population differently, a particular social problem is rarely harmful to everyone. During the recent recession, some executives earned huge salaries and bonuses, just as some corporations (such as Walmart, which sells at very low prices) actually did pretty well. Even war that brings injury and death to young soldiers brings wealth to the compa- nies that make and sell weapons and confers greater power on the military leaders who head our country’s armed forces. As a result, the full consequences of any particular social problem are rarely simple or easy to understand.

Social problems spark public controversy. Sometimes a social problem (such as the mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017) rocks the whole world. In other cases (such as the spread of the Zika virus in 2016), a small number of government leaders and public health officials take action, perhaps by stockpiling vaccine and restricting travel to areas where infections have been reported (Tavernise, 2016).

Social Problems over Time What are our country’s most serious social problems? The answer depends on when you ask the question. As shown in Table 1–1, the public’s view of problems changes over time. Back in 1935, a survey of U.S. adults identified the ten biggest problems facing the country, which we can compare to a similar survey completed in 2017 (Gallup, 2017). In the mid-1930s, the Great Depression was the major concern because as much as 25 percent of U.S. adults were out of work. Not surprisingly, unemployment topped the list of problems that year. After years of gridlock in

Table 1–1 Serious Social Problems, 1935 and 2017

1935 2017

1. Unemployment and a poor economy

1. Dissatisfaction with government/poor leadership

2. Inefficient government 2. Terrorism

3. Danger of war 3. Health care/insurance

4. High taxes 4. Economy in general

5. Government overinvolvement 5. Unemployment/jobs

6. Labor conflict 6. Race relations/racism

7. Poor farm conditions 7. Lack of national unity

8. Inadequate pensions for the elderly

8. Illegal immigration

9. High concentration of wealth 9. Moral/ethical/family decline

10. Alcohol consumption 10. International problems

SOURCE: Gallup (2017).

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 7

died from such incidents, which is actually fewer than the number of people who die each year from bee stings), but these issues are widely viewed as horrifying and serious problems all the same (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 2017; U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). Finally, Box D includes the use of cell phones, football, and a host of other activities that are not thought to be harmful and do not show up on survey listings of “problems.”

Over time, issues may move from one box to another. In the years after the invention of cell phones in the 1980s, for example, few people worried about their use even by those operating motor vehicles. With little evidence that this practice posed a threat, cell phones belonged in Box D. More recently, however, studies have reported that the use of cell phones by people driving automobiles plays some part in more than 1.6 million accidents a year, claiming thousands of lives. As the number of deaths linked to cell phone use increases, this issue will move toward Box  B. By 2018, as a result of increasing public concern, fifteen states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia) plus the District of Columbia banned talking on handheld phones while driving; thirty-eight states have outlawed cell phone use by new drivers, and forty-seven states have prohibited texting by anyone behind the wheel. Before long public opinion could define cell phone use in cars as a serious problem, moving the issue from Box  B to Box A (Governors Highway Safety Association, 2017; National Safety Council, 2017).

Any issue that is not considered a problem now may be viewed quite differently at some point in the future. For example, there are few things as American as football, a game that has gained popularity over recent decades and is now the most popular sport in the country. In recent years, however, an increasing number of players and ex-players have spoken out about possible concussion-related brain injury called chronic traumatic encephalophy (CTE). The National Football League has acknowledged that a problem exists and that efforts are being made to more carefully mon- itor the well-being of players. Exactly how widespread CTE is among players remains an open question. The 2015 film Concussion starring Will Smith raised concern about CTE among the general public (Siegel, 2015; Kindelan, 2016). Should this concern over potential injuries increase, football might well move from Box D to Box C, Box B, or even Box A, depending on how many people are found to be harmed.

Another change in public opinion involves government efforts to track people’s movement, telephone calls, and internet activity. In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, most people in the United States did not know much about efforts by the National Security Administration and other government agencies to identify suspicious behavior on the part of potential terrorists. When asked about government

Does it objectively cause serious harm to thousands of people?

Is it subjectively considered a very serious problem?

Yes

Yes

No

No

A Homicide

C School

shootings

D Use of

cell phones

B Use of

automobiles

Figure 1–1 The Objective and Subjective Assessment of Social Issues

This figure shows that some issues (such as homicide) are both objectively harmful and widely seen as problems. But many issues that are objectively harmful (the use of automobiles results in more than 32,000 deaths each year) are not perceived as serious social problems. Likewise, some issues that are viewed as serious social problems (school shootings, for example) may be tragic but they actually harm relatively few people. Many other issues (such as using cell phones or playing football) are not viewed by most people as harmful, although this may change at some point in the future.

tracking of individuals, most people offered the opinion that this was good and necessary. There was little public awareness of how government can use computer technol- ogy to threaten personal privacy (Scherer, 2013). As a result, the government’s use of computer technology fell in Box D. In recent years, revelations about the extent of government monitoring of people’s movement and communication have convinced an increasing share of the public that this issue poses a real danger to the personal freedom of every- one. For this reason, this issue appears to be moving to Box B. Perhaps, at some point in the future, most people will consider government monitoring of the public to be a seri- ous social problem, placing the issue in Box A.

Recognizing that the subjective and objective impor- tance of social issues may differ opens the door for a deeper understanding of social change. Consider this curi- ous pattern: A century ago, it was objectively true that the social standing of women was far below that of men. In 1900, nine out of ten adult men worked for income, and nine out of ten adult women remained in the home doing housework and raising children. Women didn’t even have the right to vote.

Although some people condemned what they saw as blatant inequality, most people did not define this situation as a problem. Why not? Most people believed that because women and men have some obvious biological differences, the two sexes must have different abilities. Thinking this way, it seemed natural for men to go out to earn a liv- ing while women—who were thought back then to be the “weaker sex”—stayed behind to manage the home.

8 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

A much greater threat to the public than any terror- ism is gun violence. For years, more than 30,000 deaths due to gun violence (including murder, suicide, and acci- dents) have occurred annually, which is about 100 deaths every day. And for years, few people defined gun violence as a social problem. In the 2017 listing of the most serious social problems in the United States, gun violence is not to be found.

The point is that much public concern is directed against immigrants, the vast majority of whom pose very little danger to anyone; far less public concern is directed against far-right extremists who pose far greater danger. Even more significant, gun violence involving tens of thousands of deaths each year has long been ignored and has only recently gained widespread public attention. Put another way, someone in the United States is 5,000 times more likely to be killed by gun violence than by a jihadist terrorist. Subjective fear does not necessarily reflect objec- tive facts (Kristof, 2015; Bergen, 2016; Blinder & Victor, 2018).

Claims Making For gun violence to be defined as a serious social problem, more of the political leadership in the United States— starting with the president—will have to stand up to special interests and recognize the harm involved.

Claims making refers to efforts by officials, individuals, and organizations to convince others that a particular issue or sit- uation should be defined as a social problem. This process begins by rejecting the status quo (Latin words meaning “the situa- tion as it is”) and calling for change. Put another way, claims making creates controversy by defining the existing situation as unacceptable. The process continues as people explain exactly what changes are needed and why they are needed.

Claims making is illustrated in the history of another issue that has been with us for almost forty years. Back in 1981, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention first received reports of a strange disease that was killing people. The victims were mostly homosexual men. The disease came to be known as “acquired immune deficiency syndrome” (AIDS). For several years, even as the numbers of cases in the United States climbed into the thousands, AIDS received limited media coverage and there was little public outcry. By 1985, however, the public as a whole had become concerned about the danger of AIDS, and this dis- ease was defined as a serious social problem.

What brought about this change? For any condition to be defined as a social problem, people—usually a small number at first—make claims that the situation is unac- ceptable and that change is needed. In the case of AIDS, medical officials first sounded the alarm, and the gay com- munities in large cities (notably San Francisco and New York) mobilized to spread information about the dangers posed by this deadly disease.

Objectively, gender inequality was huge; subjectively, however, it was rarely defined as a social problem.

Today, women and men are far closer to being socially equal than they were in 1900. Yet awareness of a “gender problem” in the United States has actually become greater. Why? Our cultural standards have changed, to the point that people now see the two sexes as mostly the same, and so we expect women and men to be socially equal. As a result, we view even small instances of gender inequality as a problem.

Would anyone doubt that sexual violence was a bigger problem in 1900 than it is today? The norms of the time— and, in many cases, the laws as well—made husbands’ use of physical discipline against wives either “acceptable” or a “private matter” to be resolved within a household. Today, despite a decline in sexual assault and the fact that such behavior is now widely condemned and everywhere against the law, public concern is greater than ever. Just con- sider how many millions of women and men have signed on in support of the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements.

When we investigate social issues, it is important to consider both objective facts and subjective perceptions. Both factors play a part in the social construction of social problems.

What powerful people say about issues can have big consequences for public opinion. In 2016, for the first time, immigration showed up on the public’s list of the most seri- ous social problems. To some extent, this concern reflects the fact that thousands of people cross the southern U.S. border illegally each year. But much of the concern reflects fear that immigrants from the Middle East might engage in terror. After his election in 2016, President Donald Trump fanned these fears and called for “building a wall” and enacted a “travel ban” barring people from a number of mostly Muslim countries from entering the United States until the government could ensure that no would-be jihad- ists were admitted (Suleiman, 2018).

Does this subjective fear square with the objective facts? The truth is that, since the 9/11 attacks in 2001, some 390 people have been charged with crimes relating to jihad- ist terrorism, but nine in ten of these people have been U.S. citizens or people who have permanent legal resi- dency (green cards). An isolated case of a recent immigrant engaging in deadly jihadist terrorism is Tashfeen Malik (a legal U.S. resident) who, along with her husband Syed Rizwan Farook (a natural-born U.S. citizen), killed fourteen people in a 2015 terror attack in San Bernardino, California.

Almost all terrorism that takes place in the United States is “home grown” and is not the work of immi- grants. In addition, the number of people killed by right- wing extremists (who strike out against the power of the U.S. government) is also high. But while fears of jihadist terrorism have figured into national political debate (espe- cially on the part of Republicans), far-right terrorism is not widely viewed as a social problem.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 9

the shooting death of seventeen-year-old Trayvon Martin, an activist in California posted a statement that “black lives matter.” Another activist transformed these words into the hashtag #blacklivesmatter, and this claim suddenly spread across the country, sparking a social movement. By 2018, in response to the deaths of African Americans at the hands of police, the phrase “black lives matter” was tweeted some 50 million times.

In other cases, the process of claims making may result in change only after many years. As noted earlier, although experts estimate that talking on handheld cell phones while driving causes hundreds of deaths every year, only fifteen states have passed laws banning this practice (Governors Highway Safety Association, 2017). The people of Flint, Michigan, spoke out for several years before public officials began to respond. Individual women have complained about sexual harassment and assault for decades before, helped by the power of social media, they succeeded in defining this issue as a serious social problem in 2017.

As the process of claims making gains public atten- tion, it is likely to prompt counterclaims from opponents. In other words, most controversial issues involve claims making from at least two different positions. Take the abortion controversy, for example. One side of the debate claims that abortion is the wrongful killing of unborn babies. The other side claims that abortion is a woman’s right, a reproductive choice that should be made only by the woman herself. Politics—how power plays out in a society—is a process built around claims and counter- claims about what should and should not be defined as social problems.

How do we know when claims making brings about change? The people of Flint will know they have been heard when scientists confirm that their water is safe. In

Of course, public officials and powerful individuals often engage in the “loudest” claims making. We can see this process today with increasing attention given to the opioid epidemic of government officials. But ordinary peo- ple can make claims more powerful by joining their voices. In 2016, people in the city of Flint, Michigan, began to come together and speak out about the dirty-looking and foul-tasting tap water that was coming into their homes from the city water supply. Scientists at a university labora- tory were engaged and confirmed the presence of danger- ously high levels of lead in the city’s water (Smith, 2016).

Social media have greatly increased the potential impact of claims making. Along with television, radio, and newspapers, our computers and smart phones quickly spread information to tens of millions of people who can join together in groups actively seeking change. Stories in the mass media about the dangers of tap water in Flint, Michigan, as well as the use of social media by the pub- lic, not only elevated this situation into a major problem that led to criminal charges against public officials but also alerted people in other cities to the risk of water contam- ination. In the last year, social media have been responsi- ble for fueling the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements in opposition to sexual harassment and assault.

In general, the greater the media coverage of a topic and the more media stories argue for change, the more likely the issue in question is to develop into a social problem. Media outlets devote far more attention to tornados than they do to a disease like asthma. Perhaps this is why the public per- ceives tornados as more serious despite the fact that such storms kill several dozen people a year while the death toll from asthma runs well into the thousands (Pinker, 2018).

In an age when social media connect people as never before, success in claims making can occur quickly. In 2013, shortly after a Florida jury acquitted George Zimmerman in

Claims making is the process of defin- ing certain issues as social problems. In 2017, sexual harassment rose to the level of a national problem as a result of the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements that carry forward the message that women would no longer remain silent about the experience of sexual abuse.

Sundry Photography/ Shutterstock.

10 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Problems and Social Movements The process of claims making almost always involves the deliberate efforts of many people working together. A social movement is an organized effort at claims making that tries to shape the way people think about an issue in order to encourage or discourage social change. Over the past several decades, social movements have played a key part in the construction of numerous social problems, including the AIDS epidemic, family violence, the debate over a national health insurance program, and sexual harassment.

Stages in Social Movements Typically, social move- ments progress through four distinct stages, shown in Figure 1–2, in the effort to define a condition as a social problem (Blumer, 1969; Mauss, 1975; Tilly, 1978):

1. Emergence. The emergence of a movement occurs when people (initially just a few) come together shar- ing their concern about the status quo and begin to make claims about the need for change. In 2011, for example, a group of activists proposed a gathering of people in New York City’s Zuccotti Park, and this ef- fort launched the Occupy Wall Street movement. The protestors drew attention to increasing economic in- equality, corporate greed, and the great influence that large businesses (especially those on Wall Street) have on the U.S. system of government.

2. Coalescence. The coalescence of a movement occurs as a new organization begins holding rallies and demon- strations, making public its beliefs, and engaging in political lobbying. After the initial “encampment” in the Wall Street area of New York, similar protests spread to dozens of other cities across the country and in other nations. The mass media began to discuss the claims made by the Occupy movement.

3. Formalization. Social movements become formalized as they become established players on the political scene. Although social movements usually begin with only volunteers, at this stage the organization is likely to include a trained and salaried staff. The Occupy movement has attracted many volunteers and has de- veloped a strong presence on Facebook and other social

many other cases, success in claims making is marked by the passing of a law. Enacting a law is a clear statement that some behavior is now defined as wrong, and the power of government will be used to enforce it. In recent decades, the passage of laws against stalking and sexual harass- ment have clearly defined these behaviors as problems and directed the criminal justice system to act against offenders (Welch, Dawson, & Nierobisz, 2002).

One important dimension of claims making is the delib- erate use of language. Consider the case of the Affordable Care Act, enacted in 2010. Under this law, health insurance companies could no longer refuse insurance to someone who was already sick. Opponents of the law character- ized this policy as “socializing” risk, meaning that the law forces other people to subsidize the cost of the sick individ- ual’s insurance. The word “socializing” (which sounds a lot like “socialism”) suggests that this policy is outside this country’s tradition of people taking personal responsibil- ity for their own health and insurance. On the other hand, supporters of the health care law praised an end to what they called “discrimination against those with preexisting conditions.” The use of the word “discrimination” implies that such refusal is unjust and a violation of people’s basic rights. In the same way, young people brought to the coun- try without documentation are described as “Dreamers” by those who support their right to stay and as “illegals” by those who oppose their presence.

The same careful use of language applies to debates about how to solve problems. In general, advocates choose language that makes their policy seem reasonable and nec- essary; by contrast, opponents describe the same policy in language that makes it seem unreasonable and perhaps even dangerous. In 2013, for example, Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel tried to address his city’s budget crisis by closing some public schools and moving their students to other, nearby schools. Supporters cheered what they saw as a responsible and necessary step toward a balanced budget. Opponents, alarmed at the thought of children having to walk through unfamiliar neighborhoods that might have gang activity, condemned the mayor’s policy as “killing our children” (Rogers, 2013). In short, people on both sides of any issue use language to spin claims in one way or another.

Emergence (Initial claims are made)

Coalescence (Claims are publicized)

Formalization (Claims are recognized as part of political debate)

Decline (Public interest in claims goes down)

Figure 1–2 Four Stages in the Life Course of a Social Movement

Social movements typically pass through these four stages over time. How quickly this process unfolds varies from movement to movement.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 11

salary policies, and government tax policies that dis- tribute income more and more unequally. In the same way, the loss of industrial production in the United States means that millions of people are finding only low-paying jobs or no jobs at all. In other words, prob- lems such as income inequality and unemployment have their roots in the way our economic and politi- cal systems operate. For this reason, correcting social problems requires change to society itself.

2. Social problems are not caused by bad people. This is the flip side of the first assertion. Especially when some individual harms a lot of innocent people—as when Bernard Madoff swindled investors out of $65 billion or when Stephen Paddock shot and killed fifty-eight people attending a Las Vegas concert—we think of the problem in terms of bad actions by evil people. The law holds us as individuals accountable for our actions.

But, in general, pointing to “bad people” does little to explain social problems. It is true that some people commit serious crimes that hurt others. But whether the crime rate is high or low depends not on individu- als but on how society itself is organized. As Chapter 7 (“Crime, Violence, and the Criminal Justice System”) explains, how many police we hire, how many pris- ons we build, whether the economy is strong or not, and whether all categories of people have access to good jobs or not will go a long way toward explaining whether the crime rate is low or high. In the same way, the policies toward firearms that we adopt have a lot to do with the amount of deadly violence we endure.

3. Problems are socially constructed as people define a condition as harmful and in need of change. Whatever the objective facts of any situation, people must come to see the condition as a serious social problem. Claims making is the process of defining a condition as a social problem.

4. People see problems differently. Some issues, such as the high unemployment rate during the recent recession, are widely regarded as serious problems. But most is- sues are matters of controversy. For example, the Obama administration created the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which supporters see as a needed step toward the goal of providing everyone with health insurance. Opponents of this law, including leadership in the Trump admin- istration, claim that government is inefficient, so giving government greater control over health care is likely to make care less affordable and reduce people’s range of choices about their care. As this example suggests, one person’s “solution” may be another person’s “problem.”

5. Definitions of problems change over time. The pub- lic’s views on what constitutes a serious problem change as time goes on. A century ago, the United States was a much poorer nation where no one was

media. By 2014, however, Occupy was not as prominent as it had been years before, and it now seems clear that it never did develop the level of formalization needed to remain a part of the political scene. But the message of the movement has certainly been adopted by the Democratic Party, and the issue of economic inequal- ity was widely discussed during the 2016 presidential election, especially by candidate Bernie Sanders.

4. Decline. Becoming established is no guarantee of con- tinuing success. Social movements may decline because they run out of money, because their claims fail to catch on with the public, or because opposing movements are more convincing. Sometimes, the powers that be simply have the clout to crush a social movement that threatens the status quo. The legacy of the Occupy movement will depend on whether the trend toward income inequality continues as well as on the share of our population that is willing to become invested in change, as indicated by the extent to which the Democratic Party embraces the goal of reducing economic inequality.

At the same time, a movement can decline simply because it is successful. If enough people demand greater economic equality, and changes to our economic and polit- ical systems are made, movements such as Occupy Wall Street may no longer be necessary. Even when organiza- tions succeed in reaching an initial goal, however, they may adopt new goals so that they continue to operate. The feminist movement began with the goal of getting women the right to vote and moved on to improving the stand- ing of women in the workplace and in the home. More recently, MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving) shifted its attention from combating drunken driving to the goal of opposing another movement that seeks to lower the drink- ing age from twenty-one to eighteen.

Social Problems: Eight Assertions To conclude this section of the chapter, the following eight assertions describe how sociologists approach social prob- lems. These statements sum up much of what has already been presented in this chapter, and they form the founda- tion for everything that follows.

1. Social problems result from the ways in which society operates. Society shapes the lives of each and every one of us. Because U.S. culture stresses individu- alism, we tend to think that people are responsible for their own lives. As C. Wright Mills (1959) pointed out, however, a sociological perspective shows us that so- cial problems are caused less by personal failings than by the operation of society itself. For example, the in- creasing income inequality in the United States results not from the fact that some people are working harder than others but from our economic system, corporate

12 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

problems for some people are advantageous to others, and sometimes those who benefit are powerful enough to slow the pace of change or to prevent change entirely.

The driving force behind the ACA was the fact that the United States was and remains the only in- dustrial nation without a tax-funded system that helps pay for everyone’s medical care. When Congress en- acted this new system, 33 million people still lacked health insurance, largely due to strong political oppo- sition to universal health care (especially a system that is entirely government funded) and lobbying by orga- nizations representing physicians and insurance com- panies. During its first year, the Trump administration made several failed attempts to repeal the ACA.

Even problems that everyone wants to solve sometimes defy solution. For instance, almost every- body hopes researchers find a cure for AIDS. But, de- spite advances that make “living with AIDS” a reality, the research breakthrough that finally cures this dis- ease may lie years in the future.

8. Various social problems are related. Because social problems are rooted in the operation of society, many social problems are related to one another. This means that addressing one problem—say, reducing the num- ber of children growing up in poverty—may in turn help solve other problems, such as the high rate of high school dropouts, drug abuse, and crime.

It is also true that solving one problem may create a new problem that we did not expect. For example, the in- vention of the automobile in the late 1800s helped people move about more quickly and easily, but as decades went by, automobiles were polluting the air and causing tens of thousands of traffic deaths every year (32,166 in 2015).

surprised to find many rural people living in shacks and many city people living on the streets. But as living standards rose, members of our society began to think of safe housing as a basic right, and so bad housing and homelessness emerged as social problems. Going in the other direction, some “problems” of the past have largely gone away because people no longer think of them as problems. For example, sixty years ago, inter- racial marriage was looked down upon and was actu- ally illegal in many places; such marriages, however, are now widely accepted and are legal everywhere in the country.

6. Problems involve subjective values as well as objec- tive facts. Today, about one-third of people who have ever been married have also divorced. But does this mean that there is a “divorce problem”? Facts are im- portant, but so are subjective perceptions about any issue. People who value traditional families are likely to view a high divorce rate as a serious problem. But oth- ers who think family life can limit individual opportu- nities, especially those of women, are likely to disagree.

7. Many—but not all—social problems can be solved. One good reason to study social problems is to improve society. Sociologists believe that many social problems can be effectively addressed, if not eliminated entirely. Back in 1960, for example, 35 percent of elderly men and women in the United States lived below the pov- erty line. Since then, rising Social Security benefits and better employer pensions have reduced the poverty rate to about 9.3 percent of all seniors, which is less than one-third of what it used to be.

But sociologists do not expect that every social prob- lem will be solved. As already noted, situations that are

Compared with women fifty years ago, women today are much more equal to men in terms of rights and opportunities. Actress Emma Stone, for example, makes as much money for a film as her male costars. Yet today’s women are more likely to see gender inequality as a problem. Can you explain this apparent contradiction?

D Fr

ee /S

hu tt

er st

oc k

Th e

A dv

er tis

in g

A rc

hi ve

s/ A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 13

Guatemala, three children is the norm. In the poorest nations, the number goes even higher: In Ethiopia, four children is common; in Nigeria, it’s five; and in Somalia, it’s more than six.

Analyzing Social Problems: Sociological Theory 1.3 Apply sociological theory to the study of social

problems.

Sociologists weave various facts into meaning using theory, a statement of how and why specific facts are related. Building a theory, in turn, depends on a theoretical approach, a basic image of society that guides theory and research. Using a particular theoretical approach leads sociologists to ask certain questions. The following sec- tions present the discipline’s most widely used theoretical models: the structural-functional, social-conflict, feminist, and symbolic-interaction approaches.

The Structural-Functional Approach The structural-functional approach is a theoretical framework that sees society as a system of many interrelated parts. Sociologists describe the main parts of this system as social institutions,

Together, these eight assertions form a sociological understanding of social problems. We now turn to another important idea: Addressing many social problems requires the use of a global perspective.

Social Problems: A Global Perspective Many beginning students of sociology find it hard to imagine just how serious problems such as poverty and hunger are in the poorest regions of the world. To help you understand the seriousness of global problems, the Social Problems in Global Perspective box describes patterns of inequality in a world represented by a village of 1,000 people.

Adopting a global perspective also shows us that some social problems cross national boundaries. For exam- ple, Chapter 16 (“Population and Global Inequality”) explains that Earth’s increasing human population threat- ens the well-being of everyone on the planet. Chapter 17 (“Technology and the Environment”) offers another example, showing how people living in rich countries are consuming the planet’s resources very quickly and, as they use up these resources, they are polluting the planet’s air and water.

Finally, a global perspective shows that many dimen- sions of life—and many of life’s challenges—may be quite different elsewhere. Global Map 1–1 shows us that in rich countries such as the United States, the typical woman has one or two children. But in a poorer country such as

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

The Global Village: Problems around the World To see just how desperate the lives of many of the world’s 7.6 billion people really are, imagine the entire planet reduced to the size of a “global village” of 1,000 people. The global village contains 599 Asians (including 187 citizens of the People’s Republic of China), 160 Africans, 101 Europeans, 86 Latin Americans, 5 residents of Australia and the South Pacific, and 49 North Americans, 44 of them from the United States.

The village is a very rich place with a vast array of goods and services. Yet anything beyond the basics is too expensive for almost everyone. This is because of economic inequality: The richest 1 percent of all villagers—the ten richest people—earn 15 percent of all income, and the richest 100 villagers (10 percent) earn about half of all the income. By contrast, the worst-off 200 villagers (20 percent) earn just 2 percent of all income. These people are hungry every day and even lack safe drinking water. Because of their deprivation, the poorest villagers have little energy to work and fall victim to life-threatening diseases (Ortiz & Cummins, 2011; Milanovic, 2016).

Villagers boast of their fine schools, yet only 67 people (6.7 percent) have a college degree, and 137 of the village’s adult population (13.7 percent or one in seven) cannot read or write.

Many troubling issues such as health, illiteracy, and poverty are much worse elsewhere in the world than in a rich nation such as the United States. In fact, 15 percent of the world’s people live on less than $2 a day—a standard of living far below what we in the United States consider “poor.” This harsh reality of suffering—detailed in Chapter 16 (“Population and Global Inequality”)— is one good reason to take a global perspective in our study of social problems (Milanovic, 2016; Population Reference Bureau, 2017; UNESCO, 2017; World Bank, 2017).

What Do You Think? 1. Do any of the facts presented in this box surprise you?

Which ones? Why?

2. As a person living in a rich nation, do you think you have a responsibility to help solve problems in poor nations? Why or why not?

3. Can you see ways that you, personally, benefit from the economic inequality of our world? Can you point to ways that you are harmed by inequality? Explain.

14 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

were quick to assume that pathologies must be caused by bad or weak people. The English sociologist Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) made the claim that the problem of poverty was the result of some people lacking the ability and personal discipline to work. Spencer based his think- ing on the ideas of the biologist Charles Darwin, who published a groundbreaking theory of evolution in 1859. Spencer’s “social Darwinism” viewed the rich as society’s most successful members and the poor as those who could not keep up. To Spencer, the harsh competition of the mar- ketplace was good for society because it guaranteed, as he put it, the “survival of the fittest.” For this reason, Spencer opposed social welfare programs as harmful to society because they transfer wealth from the people he consid- ered the most able to the ones he regarded as the weakest.

There is no surprise in the fact that Spencer’s ideas were very popular among the rich industrialist owners of his day. But sociologists gradually turned against Spencer because there is no scientific evidence that the rich and pow- erful are any more worthy than others or that a competitive

major spheres of social life, or societal subsystems, organized to meet a basic human need. For example, the structural-functional approach might explore how the family is a system to ensure the care and raising of children, how schools provide young people with the skills they need for adult life, how the econ- omy produces and distributes material goods, how the political system sets national goals and priorities, and how religion gives our lives purpose and meaning.

Early Functional Theory: Problems as Social Pathology A century ago, the structural-functional approach stud- ied society as if it were a living organism. This view led to social pathology theory, a model that treats social problems as a disruption in society’s normal operation, in the same way that a disease upsets the operation of the human body. Crime, truancy, and premarital sex were all seen as pathol- ogies (from a Greek word meaning “disease”) that threat- ened the health of society.

What caused society to break down? Because early functionalists viewed society as good and healthy, many

Average Number of Births per Woman

6.0 and higher

5.0 to 5.9

4.0 to 4.9

3.0 to 3.9

2.0 to 2.9

1.0 to 1.9

Cindy Rucker, 29 years old, recently took time off from her job in the New Orleans public school system to have her first child.

Although she is only 28 years old, Baktnizar Kahn has four children, a common pattern in Afghanistan.

Area of inset

ANTARCTICA

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

SOLOMON ISLANDS

VANUATU

PALAU

KIRIBATI

MARSHALL ISLANDS

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

NAURU

BRUNEISRI LANKA

PHILIPPINES

MAURITIUS

LESOTHO SWAZILAND

MOZAMBIQUE

MALDIVES

SEYCHELLES

COMOROS

SAO TOME & PRINCIPE

REP. OF THE CONGO

EQ. GUINEACÔTE D’IVOIRE TOGO

GAMBIA GUINEA-BISSAU

GUINEA SIERRA LEONE

LIBERIA

CAPE VERDE

ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES

BAHAMAS

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA DOMINICA

ST. LUCIA BARBADOSGRENADA

GUYANA

CHILE

ECUADOR

URUGUAY

HAITIJAMAICA

NICARAGUA

CUBA

DOM. REP.

GUATEMALA EL SALVADOR

BELIZE

HONDURAS

COSTA RICA PANAMA

U.S. ST. KITTS & NEVIS

SOUTH AFRICA

BOTSWANA

EGYPT LIBYAALGERIA

Macao

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

TaiwanPuerto Rico (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

Martinique (Fr.)

ZAMBIA

GABON

DJIBOUTI

NIGERMALI

NIGERIA

DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO

SUDANCHAD

KENYA

BENIN

MADAGASCAR

MAURITANIA

SENEGAL

SOMALIA

BURUNDI

TANZANIA

NAMIBIA ZIMBABWE

ANGOLA MALAWI

UGANDA RWANDA

CAM.

CENT. AFR. REP.

ETHIOPIAS. SUDAN

YEMENERITREA

BURKINA FASO

GHANA

IRAQ

RUSSIA

SURINAME

PARAGUAY

ARGENTINA

PERU

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

VENEZUELA

BRAZIL

OMAN

IRAN

INDIA

BANGLADESH

KUWAIT

SAUDI ARABIA

MOROCCO

U.A.E.

JORDAN BAHRAIN QATAR

ISRAEL LEBANON SYRIA

AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA

TUNISIA

West Bank

KYRGYZSTAN TAJIKISTAN

UNITED STATES

CANADA

GEORGIA KAZAKHSTAN

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

PAKISTAN

Greenland (Den.)

JAPAN

NORTH KOREA SOUTH KOREA

I N D O N E S I A

BHUTAN NEPAL

MYANMAR (BURMA)

Hong Kong

VIETNAM

LAOS

THAILAND

CAMBODIA

MALAYSIA SINGAPORE

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

TIMOR-LESTE

MEXICO

AFGHANISTAN

U.S.

AUSTRALIA

CHINA

RUSSIA

MONGOLIA

Western Sahara (Mor.)

SPAIN

ANDORRA

NORWAY

IRELAND

UNITED KINGDOM

DENMARK

POLANDGERMANY NETH.

BEL.

LUX. AUS.

CZECH REP.

SWITZ.

ITALY

FRANCE SLO. CROATIA

BOS. & HERZ.

FINLANDSWEDEN

ROMANIA HUNG.

SERBIA

SLVK. UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

BELARUS

ALB.

BULGARIA MAC.

GREECE

MONT. KOS.

PORTUGAL

ESTONIA

LATVIA LITHUANIA

ICELAND

Global Map 1–1 Women’s Childbearing in Global Perspective

How people live and the challenges they face differ dramatically around the world. If you are a woman living in a high-income nation, the chances are that you will have one or two children during your lifetime. But had you been born in one of the low-income nations of Africa, four, five, or even six children would be the rule. Can you point to several reasons for this global disparity?

SOURCE: Population Reference Bureau (2017).

Window on the World

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 15

on various forms of sexual violence that promises to produce some lasting changes for the better.

EVALUATE

Although the structural-functional approach has been influen- tial for more than a century, its importance has declined in recent decades. For one thing, many of today’s sociologists have a renewed interest in activism and shy away from a “hands-off” approach that they think defends the status quo. For another, by viewing society as a smoothly functioning system, the structural- functional approach pays little attention to social divisions based on race, class, and gender. Since the 1960s, more attention has been paid to a second theoretical framework: the social-conflict approach.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In a sentence, how does the structural-functional approach view society? How has this approach explained social problems in terms of social pathology, social disor- ganization, and social dysfunction?

The Social-Conflict Approach The social-conflict approach is a theoretical framework that sees society as divided by inequality and conflict. In general, conflict theories claim that social problems arise from the division of our society into “haves” and “have-nots.”

Marxist Theory: Problems and Class Conflict Marxist theory, sometimes called “class conflict theory,” is an explanation of social problems guided by Karl Marx’s the- ory of class struggle. Marx (1818–1883), a German-born thinker and social activist, was amazed by how much the new industrial factories could produce. Yet Marx criticized society for concentrating most of this wealth in the hands

economy benefits everyone. Social Darwinism has little support among sociologists today. But understanding this approach is important if only because lots of people, includ- ing some of our political leaders, still think this way.

The Chicago School: Problems as Disorganization A second type of structural-functional theory—often called the “Chicago School” because it originated at the University of Chicago, home of the first sociology department in the United States—linked problems not to deficient people but to social “disorganization” (Park & Burgess, 1970, orig. 1921). Social disorganization theory holds that problems arise when society breaks down due to social change that occurs too rapidly.

A century ago, evidence of disorganization was easy to find as industrial cities grew rapidly with the arrival of millions of immigrants. Many saw traditional family pat- terns and long-held attitudes breaking down. Schools were filled to overflowing, there was not enough housing for everyone, and crime seemed to be rising out of control.

In response to such problems, many Chicago sociolo- gists in the 1920s and 1930s became active reformers. They supported local settlement houses, set up programs to teach English to immigrants, and in a few cases even ran for public office (Faris, 1967).

More Recent Functionalism: Problems as Dysfunctions By about 1950, the structural-functional approach had changed its emphasis from activism to scientific analysis. Sociologists then began to study the positive functions (or “eufunctions”) of patterns like sports; they identified both functions that are intended and widely recognized (the “manifest functions”) as well as others that are unintended and less well known (called “latent functions”). A manifest function of sports is improving phys- ical fitness; a latent function of sports is strengthening the cultural values of individual effort and personal achieve- ment. Sociologists noted that social patterns also have negative functions (called “dysfunctions”). For example, one important dysfunction of sports on many campuses is leaving college ath- letes with little time for their studies. From this point of view, social problems can be thought of as the dysfunctions of various social patterns.

These sociologists also pointed out that just as “good” things such as sports can have some bad consequences, “bad” things such as sexual assault can some- times do some good for society as a whole. For example, the many incidents of sexual harassment and assault have greatly harmed many women, but in 2017 they also sparked a national debate

The structural-functional approach points to the contribution young people working in factories in Indonesia make to their families’ income. The social-conflict approach provides a different insight: Many of the products popular in the United States are made by young people in sweatshops that pay pennies an hour to workers.

D ea

n C

on ge

r/ C

or bi

s H

is to

ric al

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

16 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Inequality”) points out, white people continue to enjoy privileges based on race, and racial and ethnic minorities remain disadvantaged and at higher risk of poverty, poor health, street violence, and numerous other social problems. In addition, racial and ethnic prejudice is great enough on the part of some people that they see the very presence of minorities in their communities as a social problem.

EVALUATE

Offering a striking contrast to the structural-functional view of society as a well-integrated system, various social-conflict approaches now dominate the study of social problems. But taking a social-conflict approach also has limitations.

Critics fault this approach for overstating the extent of social divi- sions. They point out that, because of the general pattern of upward social mobility over the past century, few members of our society today show interest in the type of revolution advocated by Marx. Although there is still much to be done, progress has been real: Over the past century, living standards have risen and African Americans and other minorities have far more opportunities than they did in the past.

A second criticism is that social-conflict analysis rejects scien- tific objectivity in favor of political activism, which calls into question the truth of some of its claims. Marxists and multiculturalists con- cede that their work is political, but as they see it, so is any theo- retical approach, including structural-functionalism. They add that functionalism escapes the criticism of being biased only because it supports the status quo.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In a sentence, how does the social- conflict approach view society? Explain what Marxist theory and multicultural theory identify as the causes of social problems.

The Feminist Approach The feminist approach, also called the “gender-conflict” approach, is another type of social-conflict approach in sociology. Because of its increasing importance to sociolo- gists, this approach is appropriately treated on its own terms.

Feminism is a political movement that seeks the social equality of women and men. Feminists claim that women suffer more from poverty and many other social problems because society places men in positions of power over women. Gender-conflict theory explains social problems in terms of men’s dominance over women.

Chapter 4 (“Gender Inequality”) points out that although the social standing of women and men has become more equal during the past century, women work- ing full time still earn just 80.5 percent as much as men do (Semega et al., 2017). In recent decades, an increasing share of the poor is made up of women (especially single women) and their children. Just as important, working women remain concentrated in a number of low-paying jobs, and from childhood to old age, women are subject to everyday disadvantages—from subtle prejudice to out- right violence—at the hands of men.

of a few. How, he wondered, could a society so rich contain so many people who were so poor?

Marx devoted his life to analyzing capitalism, an eco- nomic system in which businesses are privately owned by people called “capitalists” who operate them for profit. To Marx, social problems are the inevitable result of the normal operation of a capitalist economy. The industrial technology of modern societies produces enough to meet everyone’s needs; modern society therefore has the productive capacity to end human suffering. Yet, Marx observed, allowing this technology to operate under a capitalist economy means that this bounty will be distributed to only a few. Capitalism, explained Marx, is a system that does not serve the people but only seeks profit for the small share of people who own factories and other productive property. Therefore, he con- cluded, it is a system that does not operate to meet human needs. As a result, the normal operation of the capitalist system creates social problems such as poverty.

Marx was critical of modern society, but he was also optimistic about the future. He predicted that, as a sys- tem that failed to meet the needs of most people, capital- ism would bring about its own destruction. In the short term, Marx concluded, the rich would become richer and richer, while the poor would have less and less. Industrial workers, whom he called “proletarians,” performed hard labor in factories for low wages while facing the ever-present threat of being replaced by machines. In the long term, Marx was certain that workers, holding little hope for the future, would join together, rise up, and end this oppressive system.

As Chapter 2 (“Economic Inequality”) explains, how- ever, such a revolution has not yet happened, at least not in industrial-capitalist nations. But followers of Marx still support a radical restructuring of society—especially the economy—as the best means to address most social problems.

Multiculturalism: Problems of Racial and Ethnic Inequality Sociologists study conflict based not only on class but also on color and culture. Societies attach importance to skin color and cultural background, which leads to ranking people in a hier- archy based on race and ethnicity. Multicultural theory explains how social problems arise from racial and ethnic inequality.

The great social diversity of the United States and the rest of the Western Hemisphere is the result of centuries of immigration. Every person who lives anywhere in the Americas, from the northern reaches of Canada to the southern tip of Chile, either migrated here from someplace else or has an ancestor who did. Here in the United States, some categories of people (especially white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, or WASPs) have enjoyed higher social stand- ing than others (especially people of color).

In 1865, the United States ended centuries of slavery, an important step in the process of giving people more equal standing before the law. Yet as Chapter 3 (“Racial and Ethnic

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 17

loneliness or as a means of economic survival. Whatever the reason, Davis found, the women she studied gradually “drifted” toward prostitution, usually taking years to learn the skills, norms, and attitudes that characterize the profes- sional sex worker. In short, people learn such roles one step at a time, eventually reaching the point where the role becomes their livelihood as well as part of their social identity.

Labeling Theory: Problems and Social Definitions The symbolic-interaction approach also explores how people socially construct reality. Labeling theory states that the reality of any particular situation depends on how people define it. For example, the spirited consumption of alcohol that young people view as normal partying may be labeled by college officials as dangerous binge drinking.

The distinction between a “social drinker” and a “prob- lem drinker” often depends on which audience is watching (do parents view drinking the same way that friends do?), who the actor is (do we view women who drink the same as we view men who do?), where the action takes place (is drinking in a park the same as drinking at a bar?), and when the action occurs (is drinking on Sunday morning different from doing the same thing on Saturday night?). Obviously, many factors come into play as people socially define a given situation.

EVALUATE

Like Marxism and multiculturalism, feminism seeks to change the status quo just as it challenges the structural-functional view of society as a well-integrated system. In recent decades, feminism has become a widely supported point of view in sociology, and it is commonly used in the analysis of social problems. But, like Marxism and multicultur- alism, this variant of the social-conflict approach also has limitations.

In the same way that critics fault Marxism for overstating “class warfare,” critics claim that feminism overstates the degree of inequal- ity that separates the sexes. Over the course of the past century, the opportunities for women—in politics, in the workplace, and in other arenas such as sports—have increased dramatically. Without deny- ing that gender inequality is still a reality, critics claim that women (like all minorities) enjoy far greater opportunities than they did in the past.

The charge of political bias is also made against feminism by its crit- ics. The fact that feminism explicitly seeks social change means that this approach is clearly a form of social activism. As in the case of Marxism and multiculturalism, defenders of feminism respond that they are com- mitted to the pursuit of social justice. They also point out that any analy- sis is political in that it either calls for social change or it does not.

A final criticism, which applies to both the structural-functional and all the social-conflict approaches, is that these macro-level approaches make use of broad generalities that seem removed from how individuals actually experience their world. This concern has led to the development of a third theoretical model: the symbolic- interaction approach.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING In a sentence, how does feminist theory see the world? Explain how feminist theory understands social problems.

The Symbolic-Interaction Approach The goal of describing society more in terms of how people experience the world underlies the symbolic-interaction approach, a theoretical framework that sees society as the product of individuals interacting with one another. We can apply this approach to social problems by asking two questions: How do people become involved in problem- atic behavior? And more generally, how do people come to define issues as social problems in the first place?

Learning Theory: Problems and the Social Environment Why do young people in one neighborhood get into more trouble than those who live in another neighborhood? Learning theory claims that people learn troublesome atti- tudes and behaviors from others around them. The point here is that no one sets out to become a burglar, a Wall Street swindler, a drug abuser, or an industrial polluter; rather, people gradually engage in such behavior as they learn skills and attitudes from others.

A learning approach guided Nanette Davis (1980, 2000) in her study of thirty women performing sex work. Interviewing these women, Davis discovered that no one simply decides to sell sex. A woman might turn to such a life for any number of reasons, perhaps as a way to cope with

Reality is often less a matter of what people do than of how they define their own behavior. Studies show that many college students consume large amounts of alcohol on a regular basis. To these students, drinking heavily may just be “partying.” College officials, however, may define such behavior as “binge drinking” or “alcohol abuse,” which can result in serious penalties.

S ha

w n

Th ew

/E PA

/R E

X /S

hu tt

er st

oc k.

18 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

poor people, or are successful people also victimized in this way? After interviewing 100 of the most successful African American men and women in the United States, Benjamin concluded that success provides no escape from racial prejudice. Even African Americans at the top of their fields encounter racial hostility in their daily lives.

William Julius Wilson (1996) conducted interviews and examined available data in a major study of poor peo- ple living in Chicago. He found that people who have lived in poverty for many years contend with a host of social problems, including joblessness, unstable families, and, perhaps worst of all, a loss of hope. Wilson found that the major reason for this poverty is the disappearance of good jobs from Chicago’s inner city.

These brief accounts are just a few examples of the research being done by thousands of sociologists across the country. The following sections provide a brief description of the research methods used by Ehrenreich, Benjamin, Wilson, and many others to study social problems—and to make the world a better place.

Research Methods Sociologists use four major research methods in their investigation of social problems: surveys, field research, experimental research, and secondary analysis.

Survey Research: Asking Questions The most widely used research procedure is the survey, a research method in which subjects respond to items on a questionnaire or in an interview. A questionnaire is a series of items a researcher presents to subjects for their response. Researchers may deliver questionnaires in person, send them through the mail, or use e-mail.

Of course, the success of a project depends on your ability to locate the people you want to survey. If you are studying, say, homeless people, identifying and tracking down subjects may be difficult because many have no

EVALUATE

The symbolic-interaction approach adds a micro-level or “real-world” view of social problems. But by highlighting how individuals differ in their perceptions, this approach overlooks the extent to which social structure, including class and race, shapes people’s lives. In other words, pointing out that prostitution involves both learning and labeling is worthwhile, but we don’t want to forget the broader issue that men dominate society and cast women into sexual roles in the first place.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING How does the symbolic-interaction approach view society? How do learning theory and labeling theory help us to understand social problems?

This completes the introduction to sociology’s major theoretical approaches, summarized in the Applying Theory table. But sociologists not only use theory to ana- lyze social problems, they also engage in research to gather relevant facts. We turn next to the ways in which sociolo- gists conduct research.

Finding the Facts: Sociological Research 1.4 Discuss the methods sociologists use to study

social problems.

Many sociologists devote their lives to investigating the nature and causes of social problems in the hope of mak- ing the world a better place. Barbara Ehrenreich (2001), for example, spent months working alongside low-wage workers in Florida, Maine, and Minnesota, documenting the many challenges faced by this country’s “working poor.” The willingness to work hard, she found, is some- times not enough to escape poverty, as millions of people throughout the United States know all too well.

The sociologist Lois Benjamin (1991) investigated the problem of racial prejudice. Is prejudice directed only at

APPLYING THEORY

Sociology’s Major Theoretical Approaches

Structural-Functional Approach

Social-Conflict and Feminist Approaches

Symbolic-Interaction Approach

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Macro-level Micro-level

What is the basic image of society?

Society is a system of interrelated parts, all of which contribute to its operation.

The social-conflict approach sees society as a system of social inequality in which some categories of people benefit at the expense of others. The feminist approach highlights inequality between men and women.

Through social interaction, we con- struct the variable and changing reality we experience.

How do we understand problems?

Society is basically good; problems are the result of deficient people, too rapid change, or dysfunctional consequences.

Problems result from inequality in terms of class (Marxism), gender (gender-conflict theory and feminism), and race (multiculturalism).

People learn attitudes and skills for all patterns of behavior; this approach explores how people may or may not define situations as problems.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 19

time, often a year or more. Finally, field researchers have to balance the demands of being a participant, who is person- ally involved in the setting, with those of an observer, who adopts a more detached role in order to assess a setting or situation more objectively.

Experimental Research: Looking for Causes Why are this country’s prisons so violent? Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues investigated this question using an experiment, a research method for investigating cause-and-effect relationships under tightly controlled conditions. Unlike field research, which takes place almost anywhere, most experiments are carried out in a specially designed laboratory. There, researchers change one variable while keeping the others the same. Comparing results allows them to identify spe- cific causes of patterns of behavior.

To investigate the causes of jailhouse violence, Zimbardo built an artificial prison in a basement at Stanford University. He recruited male students as volun- teers and then assigned the most physically and mentally healthy subjects to the roles of inmates and guards. After the “prison” had been in operation for just a few days, Zimbardo was alarmed to see that on both sides of the bars, people performing their assigned roles were becom- ing hostile and violent. In fact, the aggression was so great that Zimbardo had to end the research for fear that some- one would get seriously hurt.

Zimbardo’s research highlights the responsibility researchers have for the safety and well-being of their subjects. His study also points to a fascinating conclusion: The prison system itself—not any personal problems on the part of inmates or guards—can trigger prison violence (Zimbardo, 1972; Haney, Banks, & Zimbardo, 1973).

Secondary Analysis: Using Available Data Sometimes all that is needed to study social problems is a trip to the local library. Easier still is going online, where a vast amount of sociological information can be found. Secondary analysis is a research method that makes use of data originally collected by others. In simple terms, why go to the trouble and expense of collecting information for yourself if suitable data already exist?

Just because data are easy to find does not mean that the data are accurate. Much information that is readily available on the internet, for example, is misleading, and some of it is just plain wrong. Always look carefully to learn as much as you can about the source: Is it a repu- table organization? Does the organization have a politi- cal bias? Asking these types of questions and using more than one source will improve the quality of the data you find.

The federal government is a good source of data about almost all aspects of U.S. society. The Census Bureau contin- uously updates a statistical picture of the U.S. population— counting people, tracking immigration, assessing patterns

stable addresses. Alternatively, it would not be hard for researchers studying the medical system from the patient’s point of view to find sick people in hospitals, but gaining access to them and getting them to complete a question- naire may be challenging.

The interview is a more personal survey technique in which a researcher meets face-to-face with respondents to discuss some issue. This interactive format allows an inves- tigator to probe people’s opinions with follow-up ques- tions. Interviews take a lot of time, of course, which usually limits the number of people one can survey in this way. A good way to think about surveys is this: Questionnaires offer the chance for greater breadth of opinion, and inter- views can provide greater depth of understanding.

Whether you use a questionnaire or an interview for- mat, the key to a successful survey is selecting a sample of people that represents the larger population of interest. For example, researchers try to reach conclusions about all the police officers in a city by studying only a small num- ber of them. To make a sample representative of the larger population, researchers typically use various techniques to select subjects randomly.

Sometimes, researchers pursue a case study, in which they focus on a single case: a person (say, a divorced mother), an organization (a college or a gambling casino), or an event (a rock concert or a hurricane). The advantage of this approach is that focusing on a single case allows greater detail and depth of understanding. However, because this strategy involves a single case, researchers are not able to generalize their results.

Field Research: Joining In Have you ever walked through an unfamiliar neighborhood and observed the people who lived there? If so, you have some experience with field research (also called participant observation), a research method for observing people while joining them in their everyday activities. Field research might mean inves- tigating a particular community to understand the prob- lems and hopes of its people. Elijah Anderson (1999) did this when he studied families in some of Philadelphia’s poor African American neighborhoods. Anderson discov- ered that although most people in these neighborhoods had “decent” values, some had come to accept what Anderson calls the “code of the streets.” Such people were likely to have weak family ties, to use drugs, and, especially if they were males, to engage in episodes of violence in an effort to defend themselves and to gain the respect of others.

Field studies involve a number of challenges. For exam- ple, the researcher benefits from observing people in their natural surroundings, but as Anderson’s work suggests, fieldwork can be dangerous, especially to a researcher working alone. In addition, although this method makes sense for researchers with little money, it requires a lot of

20 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

is. In defense of this value commitment, many sociolo- gists (especially those using the social-conflict approach) argue that objective research is impossible because what- ever theory we use or whatever we may say (or not say) about the world, we end up taking some position (even if we do so by remaining silent). If this is true, then all knowledge is political, and trying to be neutral is itself a political position that ends up favoring the status quo. In the end, critics of Weber’s view say, all sociologists must take one side or another on any issue they study. This activist orientation was the hallmark of Karl Marx, who summed up his view of this controversy in words placed on his tombstone: “The philosophers have only inter- preted the world in various ways; the point, however, is to change it.”

Truth and Statistics Finally, a brief word about statistics, the numerical results that researchers often include when they report their findings. Statistics are easy ways to characterize a large number of subjects, as when a professor announces that members of a class had an average grade of 90 on a mid- term examination.

Many of us have been brought up to think of statis- tics as “facts.” How often have we been told that “numbers don’t lie”? But numbers are not always so truthful, for two reasons.

First, like all research findings, numbers must be inter- preted. A class exam average may be 90, but does that mean the students studied hard or that the exam was fairly easy? Similarly, one person can point out that the official U.S. unemployment rate fell to about 3.7 percent in 2018 and interpret this as good news because the rate has come down in the past few years, while another claims the same number is bad news because it accepts the fact that mil- lions of people are out of work. In addition, the official unemployment rate understates unemployment because it does not include people who have given up looking for work. Second, organizations, politicians, and even sociol- ogists often present statistics that support some preferred conclusion. How are we to know whether the statistics we read are presented in a misleading way? There is no easy answer, but here are three tips to make you a more critical reader:

1. Check how researchers define their terms. How peo- ple define terms affects the results. Even the most care- ful counts of the poor will vary widely, depending on how each researcher defines poverty.

2. Remember that research is never perfect. Even if we agree on how to define the poor, actually counting millions of poor women, men, and children is a very difficult task. This is especially true of those who are

of health, and reporting levels of employment, income, education, and much more. Other government agencies also collect specific information; for example, the Federal Bureau of Investigation publishes detailed statistics on crime in the United States.

Secondary analysis is often quick and easy, but this approach has its own problems. For one thing, a researcher who has not collected the data personally may be unaware of any bias or errors. Fortunately, however, the quality of most government data is high, and enough material is available to satisfy almost any researcher.

Truth, Science, and Politics Once sociologists have data in hand, they must decide what to do with them. Sociologists turn to science in order to gather their data, but science cannot solve problems for us. Science can help us learn, say, how many U.S. families are poor, and it may even yield some insights as to why they are poor. But science cannot tell us what we should do about poverty.

When we confront a social problem, we may use sci- ence to gather facts, which represent one kind of truth. But deciding how to respond to the problem always involves another kind of truth: our political values. How should sociologists tackle important and controversial issues such as poverty, family violence, and abortion? Should we sim- ply try to discover the “facts”—reporting what is happen- ing and perhaps why—and leave the political decisions about what the problems and solutions are to others? Or should we take a stand and actively try to change society for the better?

Sociologists have long debated how to square science and politics. No one wrestled more with this question than the German sociologist Max Weber (1864–1920), who urged his colleagues to focus on the facts in an effort to make research value-free. Weber knew that personal values lead people to choose one topic over another. But, Weber insisted, once a topic is selected and research is under way, social scientists should keep a professional objectivity in their work. This means that as much as possible, research- ers should hold their personal politics in check to avoid distorting the results. In practice, for example, a researcher who personally supports the death penalty must be will- ing to accept any and all results—even those that show that capital punishment has little or no effect on the mur- der rate. For Weber, the sociologist’s main goal should be discovering truth rather than engaging in politics and pro- moting change.

In recent decades, however, an increasing number of sociologists have taken an opposing view. Many believe that sociologists have a responsibility not just to learn about the world but also to help improve the lives of people who suffer from poverty and prejudice. This pur- suit of social justice might seem like taking sides—and it

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 21

Responding to Social Problems: Social Policy 1.5 Identify factors that shape how societies devise

policy to respond to social problems.

How does a society respond to social problems? This ques- tion brings us to the topic of social policy, formal strategies that affect how society operates. Organizations, including governments and colleges, create social policy to get their work done and to address social problems. Sociologists play an important role in developing social policy. Over the years, sociologists have helped direct our nation’s policy in dealing with racially segregated schools, poverty, pornog- raphy, health care, gun regulations, homelessness, racial discrimination, problems of family life, sexual harassment, and many other issues.

Policy Evaluation How do we know whether a policy works? To evaluate any policy, we must answer the following, often difficult, questions:

1. How do we measure “success”? There is more than one way to measure the success of any policy or pro- gram. Take, for example, a rehabilitation program for young people who abuse drugs. Does “success” mean that those completing the program stay “clean” for a year? Five years? Show a greater rate of completing high school? Or finding a job? There are many ways to measure the success or failure of any policy or program, so researchers must look at more than one

homeless and therefore difficult to contact. In most cases, researchers end up undercounting the poor and especially the homeless.

3. Researchers may spin their statistics. What does a “steep decrease” in the homicide rate really mean? “Low unemployment” means low in relation to what? There are countless ways to select and present statistics, and researchers often present their findings in a way that advances the argument they wish to make.

Use special care when reading tables and graphs. Figure 1–3 illustrates the problem with three graphs show- ing changes in the U.S. unemployment rate. All three figures are drawn using data from the U.S. government. Graph (a) might be titled “Unemployment Goes Up and Down!” because it presents data across a time frame that shows both a decreasing and an increasing rate of unem- ployment. Graph (b) uses the same time frame but changes the scale to flatten the line, supporting a title such as “Unemployment Holds Steady!” Graph (c) uses a limited time frame over just five years to display the decline in unemployment from 2009 to 2016. Here we can announce “Unemployment Coming Down!”

Ideally, sociologists strive for accuracy, clarity, and fairness in their work and use statistical data with the intent to convey information rather than to mislead read- ers. But, keeping in mind that researchers have to make choices about how to present their numbers, you should always think critically about statistical information and how it is presented, whether it appears in textbooks or anywhere else. Never assume that statistics are the absolute truth.

P er

ce nt

o f

La b

o r

Fo rc

e (%

)

P er

ce nt

o f

La b

o r

Fo rc

e (%

)

P e r

ce nt

o f

La b

o r

Fo rc

e (%

)

Year(a) (b) (c)Year Year

0

20

40

60

80

100

1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 2020

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2012 2014 2016 2018 2020

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Figure 1–3 Do Statistics Lie?

Analysts, including sociologists, can “spin” their data to encourage readers to reach various conclusions. These three graphs are based on the same factual data. Yet the way we construct each graph suggests a different reality. The scale used in graph (a) gives the impression that the employment rate displays a lot of volatility, rising and falling over time. Graph (b) changes the scale to flatten the line, thus giving the impression that the unemployment rate has changed little. Graph (c) presents data only for the years 2011 through 2018, giving the impression that the unemployment rate is sharply falling.

SOURCE: Data from U.S. Department of Labor (2018).

22 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

to eliminate it; a policy to guarantee a minimum income would end the problem very quickly. But because our way of life stresses self-reliance, there is not much support for what would be widely criticized as “handout” policies. Guided by a culture that defines people as responsible for their social standing, we tend to see the poor as “unde- serving” of assistance. Such cultural values were at work in 1996 when Congress and the White House acted with widespread public support to change public assistance programs so that fewer people were dependent on govern- ment support.

Policy and Politics The kinds of policies people favor depend on their political point of view. People with a politically conservative outlook usually turn to the past for guidelines about how to live in the present and how to shape the future. Conservative people try to limit the scope of societal change. They tend to view the existing society as good, leading them to con- clude that problems arise mostly because of the actions and choices of bad individuals. This is why conservatives favor policies that treat problems as shortcomings of particular individuals rather than as shortcomings of society. If the problem is unemployment, for example, conservatives might suggest helping jobless people get more schooling or learn new skills in order to make them more attractive to employers. By supporting policies that place more respon- sibility on individuals to take care of themselves, conserva- tives accept society as basically good the way it is. In short, they support the status quo.

By contrast, people with more liberal views see problems in the organization of society itself and favor greater social change. They are more likely to understand unemployment, for example, as caused by a society’s economy. Therefore, to combat unemployment, liberals seek societal reforms, such as strengthening antidiscrimination laws, expanding the power of labor unions, or calling for government to create enough jobs to provide work for the people who need it.

People with radical-left views seek policies that go beyond the reforms suggested by liberals. From their point of view, social problems exist because the entire system is flawed in some basic way. For example, Marxists claim that replacing the market-based, capitalist economy with a government-controlled economy is the only real answer to problems such as high unemployment and increasing economic inequality. Because radical policies are, by defi- nition, outside the political mainstream, they spark both committed support and widespread opposition.

We conclude this chapter—and each of the remaining chapters—with a discussion of how political attitudes lead people to define certain situations as problems in the first place and to define certain kinds of policies and programs as solutions to those problems.

before deciding whether a particular program is a fail- ure or a success.

2. What are the costs of the policy or program? We live in a world of limited budgets and competing priorities, so policy evaluation means weighing results against costs. It may be possible to improve schools by increas- ing funding, for example, but a local community may not support raising property taxes.

The costs of any program involve not just money but ethical concerns as well. For example, installing surveillance cameras on public streets may reduce crime or at least drive criminal activity elsewhere. Yet many citizens object to having their movements— including which stores they visit and with whom they strike up a conversation—recorded in computer files by public officials. In short, street surveillance may be successful in reducing crime but may involve an unac- ceptable cost by taking away people’s privacy.

3. Who should get the help? In assessing a social pol- icy, another key question is whom the policy should target for assistance. To combat poverty, should agen- cies work with adults who need jobs? Provide a good breakfast to poor children in school? Provide prenatal care to pregnant women? All of these things may be helpful, but limited budgets require agencies to make choices about whom to target.

One guideline for making such decisions is Benjamin Franklin’s old saying, “An ounce of preven- tion is worth a pound of cure.” Generally, the earlier the intervention, the more successful a policy is and the lower the costs. For example, helping boys before they get into trouble costs less—and accomplishes more— than putting them in jail later on.

Sherry Deane of the National Black Child Development Institute says that too many programs kick in too late: “We spend so much more money after the problem has occurred—after a baby is born at low birth weight, after a child begins to fail in school, after a child is in trouble with the law—instead of making an early investment in the child with prenatal care, preven- tive health care, early education” (Goldman, 1991:5).

Policy and Culture Social policy is also shaped by cultural values. That is, societies respond to a social problem in a particular way not necessarily because that approach is cheapest or works best but because a particular response, according to the society’s culture, seems to be “the right thing to do.”

There are more than 40 million poor people in the United States, many living with inadequate nutrition, unsafe housing, and little or no medical care. Poverty persists in this country not because no one knows how

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 23

2010 elections marked a shift to the right. In 2012, President Obama was reelected in another shift leftward, and Republican gains in Congress marked another rightward shift in 2014. In 2016, in a closely contested election, Donald Trump won the presidency and shifted national politics fur- ther to the right.

But at any time, there is always wide variation in this nation’s political thinking. Some of this variation is regional: The people of Massachusetts and Minnesota almost always elect liberal candidates, just as those living in Mississippi and Texas usually elect conservatives. Similarly, some eth- nic categories, such as African Americans, Jews and, to a lesser extent, Hispanics, historically have favored liberal positions; others, such as Asian Americans, tend to be rela- tively more conservative.

Conservatives, Liberals, and Radicals What do labels such as “conservative,” “liberal,” and “rad- ical” really mean? Here is a brief statement to get us going. The deeper meaning of these three concepts will become clear as you read through the chapters that follow, apply- ing each point of view to various issues.

Conservatives look to the past for guidance about how to live. They believe that the past is a store of wisdom developed by countless generations who have already con- fronted many of the same questions and issues that we face today. A good society, from the conservative point of view, is respectful of traditions and tries to conserve what earlier generations have learned. Conservatives have a special interest in the family and religion—the social institutions that transmit our moral traditions. Conservatives also typically seek to limit the size and scope of government. They tend to see “big government” as a problem because it threatens individual freedom and undermines people’s responsibility to take care of themselves. Typically, conser- vative people tend to support the Republican Party and the Libertarian Party more than the Democratic Party.

Liberals have a different view of the world. In simple terms, liberals (from a Latin word for “free”) think people should be free from the past to decide, on their own, ques- tions about how to live. A good society, from a liberal point

POLITICS

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 1.6 Analyze how political attitudes shape the process of

constructing social problems and defining solutions.

The social-constructionist approach described earlier is useful for exploring how political views guide people as they define social problems and devise solutions. Let us begin with a look at the political spectrum.

The Political Spectrum We become part of the political process as we form attitudes about various issues. Social scientists measure people’s opinions using a model called the political spectrum, a continuum representing a range of political attitudes from “left” to “right.” As shown in Table 1–2, attitudes on the political spectrum range from the far left at one extreme through “middle of the road” views at the center to the far right at the other extreme.

The data in Table 1–2 show that 27.7 percent of peo- ple consider themselves liberal or left of center to some degree (adding the numbers at points 1, 2, and 3 together); 36.0 percent say they are moderates (falling in the middle at point 4); and 32.4 percent say that they are conservative or right of center to some degree (adding the numbers at points 5, 6, and 7 together). The remaining 3.9 percent of respondents did not know or simply did not answer the question. Grouping people another way, we see that a majority of people place themselves near the middle of the political spectrum (points 3, 4, or 5), and just a small percentage describe themselves as holding what might be called a radical view, either at the far left (at point 1 on the continuum) or the far right (point 7 on the continuum).

Over time, political attitudes may shift to the left (as they did during the 1960s) or to the right (as they did in the 1980s). Recent years reveal short-term political trends: In 2008, the election of Democratic candidate Barack Obama marked a shift to the left, and the Republican gains in the

Table 1–2 The Political Spectrum: A National Survey, 2016 Survey Question: “We hear a lot of talk these days about liberals and conservatives. I’m going to show you a seven-point scale on which the political views people might hold are arranged from extremely liberal—point 1—to extremely conservative—point 7. Where would you place yourself on this scale?”

SOURCE: The data in this figure are from General Social Surveys, 1972–2016 (Chicago: National Opinion Research Center, 2017).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Extremely liberal Liberal Slightly liberal Middle of the road Slightly conservative Conservative Extremely conservative

4.7% 12.2% 10.8% 36.0% 13.3% 14.9% 4.2%

[Don’t know/no answer 3.9%]

24 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

marijuana, the death penalty, immigration, transgender rights, gender inequality, and sexual harassment.

Leaning Left People who lean to the left on social issues are called “social liberals.” In general, social liberals think that people should be free to shape their lifestyles for themselves. In practice, then, social liberals are broadly tolerant of various alternative lifestyles. They also favor expanding opportunities for women, oppose all forms of sexual assault, support the pro-choice side of the abortion controversy, look favorably on racial and ethnic diversity and welcome immigrants coming to the United States, support legal marriage for gay and lesbian people, and favor expanding rights for transgender people. On the other hand, social liberals oppose the death penalty partly because, in the past, states have been more likely to exe- cute African Americans than whites and the poor rather than the rich, even considering people convicted of the same crimes.

Leaning Right People who lean to the right on social issues are called “social conservatives.” Social conser- vatives are respectful of traditional values and want to conserve them. Conservatives criticize what they see as too much tolerance in today’s society, which amounts to moral decline. Social conservatives favor the pro-life side of the abortion controversy. In addition, they are con- cerned about controlling this country’s borders, both to uphold the law and also to protect our cultural traditions. Social conservatives also support the traditional family in which women and men have different roles and responsi- bilities. Social conservatives also endorse the death pen- alty as a necessary moral response to especially brutal criminal acts.

Economic Issues The second type of issues involves economics. Economic issues are political debates about how a society should produce and distribute material resources. These debates typically focus on the degree to which the economy should be under the control of government or a market system. (Chapter 11, “Economy and Politics,” explores these issues in depth.)

Leaning Left In general, economic liberals (who lean to the left on economic issues) favor government regu- lation of the economy in order to reduce inequality. A free-market system, liberals claim, too often works to the advantage of a select few and leaves everyone else behind. For this reason, economic liberals support strong government that is able to regulate the economy through policies such as raising the minimum wage, setting high taxes especially on the rich, and using tax revenues to pay for health care, free education, and other social ser- vice programs that help average families and, especially, the poor.

of view, is one in which people are able to make choices for themselves. This requires that society be both tolerant and respectful of individual rights. It also requires that cat- egories of people be more or less equal in terms of basic rights and opportunities. Therefore, liberals have a special interest in the economy and politics because these are the social institutions that distribute wealth and power. Liberals typically seek to expand the size and scope of government. They see government power as a solution because it is an effective way to reduce inequality and to make other pro- gressive changes that benefit everyone. In general, lib- eral people support the Democratic Party more than the Republican Party.

Although liberals and conservatives differ in some important ways, both accept the existing political system, at least in most respects. In contrast, people with more extreme views seek more basic change in society. Such are the attitudes of radicals (from Latin meaning “of the root”) because they hold that the system must be changed right down to its roots. Radicals point to some basic flaw in soci- ety that is responsible for any number of social problems. For people on the far right, the historical expansion of “big government” is the basic flaw, leading to the claim that government is involved in far too many dimensions of our daily lives. In a few cases, people who hold far right views try to escape the reach of government to remote places where they live as “survivalists.” Radicals also include people on the far left. For Marxists, the basic flaw in society is the capitalist economic system that creates social classes; as they see it, a socially just society could exist only after the abolition of capitalism. Similarly, for radical feminists, the basic flaw is the concept of gender that gives rise to patriarchy, the power of men over women. They claim that a socially just society could exist only with the abolition of gender differences. Typically, people with radical views do not support either the more mainstream Democratic Party or Republican Party. Some may vote for the main- stream candidate closest to their political position; others may support “fringe” candidates; still others may choose not to vote at all.

Can we sum up these different views of the world in a single sentence? It might go something like this: Conservatives talk about the importance of traditions and, in most respects, keeping society the way it has been; lib- erals talk about the need to reform society to make it more equal; radicals talk about organizing society in some com- pletely new way.

Social Issues People hold political positions on two types of issues: social issues and economic issues. Social issues are politi- cal debates involving moral judgments about how people should live. Some of today’s leading social issues include abortion,

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 25

likely to support government-enacted economic programs that may benefit them, which makes them economically liberal (Kohut, 2012).

Keep in mind that most of us—whatever our social standing—tend to hold some combination of liberal and conservative attitudes. This inconsistency helps explain why so many people call themselves “moderates,” “cen- trists,” or “middle-of-the-roaders.”

A Word about Gender Finally, what about any differ- ences between women and men? Political analysts have documented a modest gender gap in voting patterns that paints women as slightly more liberal than men. Surveys of voting behavior show that women are somewhat more likely to vote for Democratic candidates, and men are more likely to favor Republicans. In the 2008 presidential elec- tion, for example, 56 percent of women but only 49 per- cent of men voted for the Democratic candidate, Barack Obama. This pattern was repeated in 2012 with 55 per- cent of women compared with 45 percent of men voting for President Obama. In the 2016 presidential election, 54 percent of women and 41 percent of men supported the Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton. Donald Trump won the election with support of 53 percent of men and 42 per- cent of women voters. In general, men express greater con- cern about having a powerful military to ensure national security (generally viewed as a conservative or Republican issue), and women express greater concern about keeping an adequate social safety net to help those in need (a liberal or Democratic issue) (Pew Research Center, 2012; Tyson & Maniam, 2016).

A Word about Political Parties and the 2016 Presidential Election In general, people who lean left support the Democratic Party and people who lean right support the Republican Party. The presidential elections of 2004, 2008,

Leaning Right By contrast, economic conservatives (who lean to the right on economic issues) call for a smaller role for government in the economy. From their point of view, the market—not government officials—can set wage levels more fairly and efficiently. In addition, conservatives claim that motivated individuals and the businesses they create (rather than government agencies) are the key to growing the economy, generating greater wealth that benefits every- one. Government regulation of economic activity limits economic growth and raises the cost of doing business and also reduces personal choice and freedom. Economic con- servatives support lower tax rates in the belief that peo- ple should be able to keep more of their own earnings and use this money as they choose to spend or to invest and expand the economy. In doing so, people take responsibil- ity for their own well-being.

Who Thinks What? What types of people are likely to fall on each side of the political spectrum? Social standing is a good predictor, but it turns out that most people are actually liberal on one kind of issue and conservative on another.

People of high social position, those with lots of schooling and above-average wealth, tend to be liberal on social issues. But they are more conservative on economic issues. That is, most highly educated people are tolerant of lifestyle diversity (the liberal view), but many privileged people also seek to protect their wealth (the conservative position).

People with less education and wealth show a differ- ent pattern. Typically their values are more traditional so that they tend to see moral issues as clear-cut choices that are right or wrong, which is the socially conservative view. At the same time, with less economic security, they are

Lower-income people tend to be very concerned about economic issues, for the simple reason that they lack economic security. Recently, thousands of people marched in Los Angeles to demand a $15/hour minimum wage. Higher-income people, by contrast, take economic security for granted. They are likely to be more concerned about social issues, such as ending discrimination against LGBT people. The people in the photo at the right are speaking up for transgender rights.

M ic

ha el

N ig

ro /P

ac ifi

c P

re ss

/L ig

ht R

oc ke

t / G

et ty

Im ag

es .

X in

hu a/

A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

26 Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Keep in mind this key fact: Social problems are socially constructed. Political attitudes guide what we define as a problem and what policies we are likely to support as solu- tions. Recognizing and respecting the diversity of political attitudes in the United States, this text does not assume that everyone will agree about what the problems are or what the best solutions might be. On the contrary, we all should expect and welcome disagreement. The goal is to engage in conversation. The word “conversation” is closely linked to the word “convert,” meaning “to change.” When we engage in good-faith conversation, we take respon- sibility for stating our own opinions, listening to others, and asking and answering questions. Most of all, as we exchange ideas with others, we should have a willingness to change our positions as a result of learning more.

Throughout this text, you will read diverse analysis explaining how the libertarian, conservative, liberal, and left-radical political attitudes lead people to define social problems and to decide what we ought to do about them. Try to understand each of the various points of view. You will soon see for yourself that to come to a point where you can claim any one point of view as your own requires familiarity with all points of view. In addition, understand- ing various points of view helps to explain why our soci- ety has such long-standing and intense debates over social issues. Finally, gaining a diverse understanding of politics also helps us understand that one person’s solution often turns out to be another’s problem.

What should you expect by the time you have finished this text? You will have learned a great deal about many of the social issues that command the attention of govern- ment officials and the public, both in the United States and around the world. You will gain familiarity with sociology’s theoretical approaches so that you can apply them to new issues in the future. Finally, with a firm grasp of the various political positions and arguments, you will find it easy to analyze new issues as you confront them. With this ability, you become an active participant in the political process.

A social problems course is an invitation to get involved in political debates and political action. Each chapter of this text provides a feature called “Constructing Social Problems: A Defining Moment” that shows how easy—and how important—it is to become involved in the political life of our nation. Throughout the text photo essays provide a look at people and organizations mak- ing a difference in the country and in the world. You will find many examples of “ordinary” people like you or me who decided to take some action in a way that made a dif- ference. Let us be inspired by them and live in a way that inspires others!

2012, and 2016 yielded two victories for Democrats (Obama in 2008 and 2012) and two victories for Republicans (Bush in 2004 and Trump in 2016). This pattern suggests that, over the years, power tends to shift back and forth from one major party to the other.

In 2016, the election of Donald Trump was not good news to Democrats. But Trump is also not a conventional Republican; news reports indicated, for example, that no one in the Bush family voted for him. Trump had the support of many pro-business Republicans and many religious or Evangelical Republicans. But his victory was based on a high turnout among people who, in the past, were less likely to vote at all. These voters included rural people, working-class urban people, and people without college degrees. They are concentrated in regions of the country that have experienced economic downturns— especially in states like Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania—all of which were carried by Trump. What all these various Trump voters had in common is that they felt left behind by both major parties. In addition, they see the United States as being in decline, losing our economic power, military might, and cultural heritage. In short, Trump victory depended on support from people who wanted to “make America great again.” The major reason most analysts (and probably even Trump himself) were surprised at the outcome of this election is that these “dis- affected voters” turned out in far greater numbers than anyone expected.

A year in to Trump’s term, polls showed party affili- ation to be a strong predictor of people’s support for the president. Not surprisingly, support was highest among people who claimed to be Republican (about 80 percent) and lowest among those who said they are Democrats (7 percent). With President Trump’s approval rating hovering around 40 percent, the nation remains bitterly divided— especially in the wake of Brett Kavanaugh taking a seat on the Supreme Court, there may be a significant political shift in the 2018 midterm elections (Burlij & Agiesta, 2017; Dugan, 2017; Gallup, 2018).

Going On from Here This chapter has presented important information that you will need in order to understand the rest of the book. Each chapter that follows focuses on important issues that are debated by politicians and the public across the country. To make better sense of these issues, each chapter will present research findings and will also apply sociology’s major theo- retical approaches—the structural-functional, social-conflict, feminist, and symbolic-interaction approaches—to the issues.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 27

Martin Luther King Jr. is one of only four people in the history of our country whose birthday has become a national holiday (George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Christopher Colum- bus are the others). When we celebrate King’s life, we recognize that our society has grappled with the issue of racial inequality for centuries and that this problem has yet to be solved.

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment A Call to Action: The Message of Martin Luther King Jr. Martin Luther King Jr. (1929–1968) was born in Atlanta at a time when black people and white people were kept apart by a strict system of racial segregation. Taught in racially segregated classrooms, King graduated from high school at the age of fifteen. Then, like his father and grandfather, he earned a bachelor’s degree from Morehouse College, a traditionally black institution.

Also like his father and grandfather, King set out to become a preacher. He enrolled at the Crozer Theological Seminary in Pennsylvania, where his mostly white classmates elected him president of the senior class. He received his theology degree in 1951. King continued his studies at Boston University, which awarded him a doctorate in 1955.

In 1954, King was appointed pastor at the Dexter Avenue Baptist Church in Montgomery, Alabama. Quickly, he became a community leader, heading up not only his church but also the local chapter of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP). The city of Montgomery—like the rest of the South—was still racially segregated, and people of color were restricted to their own businesses and neighborhoods and required to sit in separate sections at the rear of city buses. King condemned racial segregation as morally wrong and decided to take action to challenge the status quo. In December 1955, he led a nonviolent social movement that came to be known as the Montgomery bus boycott. Thousands of people pledged that they would no longer ride the buses until the city allowed all people equal access to seats on public transportation. The boycott continued for more than a year, ending only after the U.S. Supreme Court declared that the racial segregation of public transportation was unconstitutional.

King had won a great victory, but there was still powerful resistance to racial equality, which made his life difficult and dangerous. King faced hostility not only from members of the public but also from police. He was arrested dozens of times, his home was attacked, and some opposed to his cause made threats against King’s life. But King held firm in his beliefs. In 1957, he was elected president of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference, emerging as the leader of the national civil rights movement. His activism continued for another decade, culminating in a civil rights march in Washington, D.C., that included more than 250,000 people who gathered to hear him deliver his famous “I Have a Dream” speech.

King was a great national and international change-maker, and he stands among a handful of people in the United States honored with a national holiday each year (celebrated on the third Monday in January, near King’s birthday). But King was the first to

say that his life should not be taken to mean that only great people can accomplish great things; he saw his own life as evidence the power to make a difference is within the reach of everyone. King held the view that anyone can be great because anyone can serve others. He did not think that great people had to be rich or well educated. Rather, he reminded us that to serve others, all anyone needs is a heart full of grace and the desire to help.

King’s message is an invitation to each and every one of us to learn more about our society and to recognize that, as human beings, our lives are bound up with the lives of everyone else whether they live around the corner or around the world. Following King’s example, look for a way in which you can make a positive difference in the life of at least one other person. Get involved!

B et

tm an

n/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Whose problem is it?

This chapter has explained that different political attitudes lead people to disagree about what the problems are. And even when we do agree about the problems, we are likely to define differ- ent courses of action as solutions. Over the past several years, almost everyone has recognized increasing economic inequality that leaves millions of families without economic security. Look at the accompanying photos to see two different approaches to fixing the problem.

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

The more we favor the left side of the political spectrum, the more we look to government to manage the economy and ensure that families are secure. From a left point of view, best represented in the 2016 presidential campaign by Bernie Sanders, a job is a right to be guaranteed by government, which should set a minimum wage of at least $15 an hour rather than allow pay to reflect market forces of supply and demand.

K ev

in L

am ar

qu e/

Th om

so n

R eu

te rs

(M ar

ke ts

) L LC

.

28

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 29

Hint: A key difference between the two sides of the political spectrum is how economic life

should be organized. Seen from the political right, the economy should be based on a market

system in which people freely act according to their individual interests. Therefore, primary

responsibility for finding and holding a job lies with the individual. Conservatives tend to support

the free market, and they distrust “big government” as a threat to personal freedom and limiting

to economic expansion. From the political left, by contrast, the government should represent the

public interest, regulating the economy through policies such as setting minimum wage levels

and mandating working conditions. When operating on its own, liberals claim, “big business”

creates economic inequality by concentrating wealth in the hands of a few. As for personal

responsibility, liberals believe that because many problems are rooted in society, individuals

cannot solve such problems for themselves. In the 2016 presidential campaign, the Democratic

candidates Hillary Clinton (a moderate liberal) and especially Bernie Sanders (farther to the left)

both claimed that people’s success or failure is not so much about who is smarter or works

harder but how wealth and power are distributed in the United States. Republicans candidates,

including Donald Trump, took a more conservative position, claiming that a productive and

free society rests on a market system that allows people to pursue their dreams. Democrats

called for higher taxation to reduce economic inequality and fund new government benefits;

Republicans, however, won the election and went on to reduce taxes on individuals and,

especially, on corporations with the goal of encouraging investment and economic growth.

1. Explain how the following slogans from bumper stickers are examples of claims making: (a) “Build the Wall”; (b) “Guns Don’t Kill People; People Kill Peo- ple”; (c) “It’s a Child, Not a Choice”; (d) “When You Elect Clowns, Expect a Circus”; and (e) “I’m a Republi- can: I work so you don’t have to.”

2. What kinds of questions might you ask about, say, pov- erty, using the structural-functional, symbolic-interaction, feminist, and Marxist social-conflict approaches?

3. Identify several national politicians—try to include your own members of Congress—who fall on the

conservative and liberal sides of the political spectrum. What are their views on social issues such as sexual vi- olence and transgender rights and on economic issues such as U.S. corporations moving abroad and raising taxes to reduce income inequality?

4. Explain how people’s political attitudes affect the kinds of issues they are likely to define as social prob- lems. For example, do conservatives or liberals see the “breakdown of the traditional family” as a social prob- lem? Why? Are conservatives or liberals more con- cerned about economic inequality? Explain.

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises

The more we favor the right side of the political spectrum, the more we expect people to set their own goals and to solve economic problems for them- selves. Conservatives claim that a job is a personal responsibility, and they suggest that, to find a good job, people have to ensure that they have the necessary personal skills and ambition as well as sufficient training for the type of job they are seeking.

Gilles Mingasson/Getty Images.

30

Making the Grade CHAPTER 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems

Seeing Patterns: The Sociological Imagination

1.1 Explain the benefits of learning about sociology and using the sociological imagination.

Sociology is the systematic study of human societies.

• Sociologist C. Wright Mills coined the expression “the sociological imagination” to encourage people to view their own personal problems as connected to the workings of society.

Social Problems: The Basics

1.2 Define the concept “social problem” and explain how the people in a society come to define some issues—and not others—as social problems.

A social problem is a condition that undermines the well-being of some or all members of a society and is usu- ally controversial.

• A social-constructionist approach holds that a social problem is created as society defines some condition as undesirable and in need of change.

• The specific conditions defined as social problems change over time.

• At any particular time, the objective facts and the sub- jective perception of any social issue may or may not be the same.

• A global perspective is important because many social problems cross national boundaries. Also, many prob- lems, such as poverty, are more serious elsewhere in the world than in the United States.

Claims making refers to efforts by officials, individuals, and organizations to convince others that a particular issue or situation should be defined as a social problem. Claims made by one group of people typically prompt counter- claims by other groups.

Social movements typically go through four stages: emer- gence, coalescence, formalization, and decline.

sociological imagination (p. 4) a point of view that highlights how society affects the experiences we have and the choices we make sociology (p. 5) the systematic study of human societies society (p. 5) people who live within some territory and share many patterns of behavior culture (p. 5) a way of life including widespread values (about what is good and bad), beliefs (about what is true), and behavior (what people do every day)

social problem (p. 5) a condition that undermines the well- being of some or all members of a society and is usually a matter of public controversy social-constructionist approach (p. 6) the assertion that social problems arise as people define conditions as undesirable and in need of change claims making (p. 8) efforts by officials, individuals, and orga- nizations to convince others that a particular issue or situation should be defined as a social problem social movement (p. 10) an organized effort at claims making that tries to shape the way people think about an issue in order to encourage or discourage social change

Analyzing Social Problems: Sociological Theory

1.3 Apply sociological theory to the study of social problems.

Sociologists use theoretical approaches to guide their research and theory building. The major theoretical approaches—structural-functional, social-conflict, femi- nist, and symbolic-interaction—all provide insights into various social problems.

Macro-Level The structural-functional approach sees society as a com- plex system of many different parts.

• Early social pathology theory viewed problems as dis- ruptions in society’s normal operation.

• Later, social disorganization theory linked social prob- lems to rapid change.

• More recently, functionalism views social problems in terms of the dysfunctions of various social patterns.

The social-conflict approach highlights social inequality, in- cluding inequality based on class and on race and ethnicity.

• Class conflict theory, based on the ideas of Karl Marx, links social problems to the operation of a capitalist economic system.

• Multicultural theory spotlights problems arising from inequality between people in various racial and ethnic categories.

The feminist approach highlights social inequality based on gender. Feminist theory links social problems to men’s domination of women.

Micro-Level The symbolic-interaction approach helps us understand how people experience social problems in their routine, ev- eryday interactions.

Chapter 1 Sociology: Studying Social Problems 31

• The learning approach links social problems to the learn- ing of undesirable skills and attitudes from others.

• The labeling approach investigates how and why people come to define certain behaviors as problematic and others as normal.

Social policy refers to strategies that societies use to address problems.

• A society evaluates a social policy based on its success, its cost, and whether the population it targets represents the best solution to a social problem.

• Societies favor social policy that reflects important cultural values.

• The kinds of policies individual people favor depend on their political attitudes.

theory (p. 13) a statement of how and why specific facts are related theoretical approach (p. 13) a basic image of society that guides theory and research structural-functional approach (p. 13) a theoretical framework that sees society as a system of many interrelated parts social institution (p. 13) a major sphere of social life, or a societal subsystem, organized to meet a basic human need social-conflict approach (p. 15) a theoretical framework that sees society as divided by inequality and conflict feminism (p. 16) a political movement that seeks the social equal- ity of women and men symbolic-interaction approach (p. 17) a theoretical framework that sees society as the product of individuals interacting with one another

Finding the Facts: Sociological Research

1.4 Discuss the methods sociologists use to study social problems.

Sociologists use a variety of methods to investigate social problems.

Survey research can take different forms:

• A questionnaire is a series of items a researcher presents to subjects for their response.

• An interview is a more personal survey technique in which a researcher meets face-to-face with respon- dents to discuss some issue.

• A case study focuses on a single person, organization, or event.

Field research allows a researcher to observe people over a long period of time.

Experimental research is carried out in a laboratory. Researchers change one variable while keeping the others the same in order to identify causes of patterns of behavior.

Secondary analysis of existing data can be quick and easy, but a researcher must be careful not to rely on data that may be incorrect or contain a political bias.

survey (p. 18) a research method in which subjects respond to items on a questionnaire or in an interview field research (participant observation) (p. 19) a research method for observing people while joining them in their everyday activities experiment (p. 19) a research method for investigating cause- and-effect relationships under tightly controlled conditions secondary analysis (p. 19) a research method that makes use of data originally collected by others

Responding to Social Problems: Social Policy

1.5 Identify factors that shape how societies devise policy to respond to social problems.

social policy (p. 21) formal strategies that affect how society operates

POLITICS Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions

1.6 Analyze how political attitudes shape the process of constructing social problems and defining solutions.

The political spectrum is a model representing people’s attitudes about social issues and economic issues.

Conservatives claim that social problems arise from the shortcomings of particular individuals or the bad choices people make about how to live.

• Conservatives see the family and religion as import- ant social institutions transmitting the moral traditions that guide people to live good lives.

Liberals claim that social problems arise from the operation of society, including patterns of social inequality that pre- vent categories of people from having equal opportunity.

• Liberals seek reform rather than radical change in so- cial institutions.

On the radical left, Marxists claim that social problems re- sult from the operation of the capitalist economic system.

• From the far-left point of view, the solution to social problems requires radical change to our society’s insti- tutions, beginning with the economy.

The radical right claims that the most serious problem our society faces is the growth of big government, which threatens individual freedoms.

• Some people on the far right withdraw from society altogether to live as survivalists in remote areas.

Generally speaking, conservatives favor the Republican Party, while liberals favor the Democratic Party.

political spectrum (p. 23) a continuum representing a range of political attitudes from “left to right” social issues (p. 24) political debates involving moral judgments about how people should live economic issues (p. 24) political debates about how a society should produce and distribute material resources

32

2.4 Explain the changing ways our society has used the social welfare system to respond to poverty.

2.5 Apply sociological theory to the issue of poverty.

2.6 Analyze economic inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

2.1 Describe the distribution of income and wealth in the United States.

2.2 Assess differences in the lives of the rich and the poor in the United States.

2.3 Analyze how poverty is linked to other social problems.

Chapter 2

Economic Inequality

S lim

A ar

on s/

P re

m iu

m A

rc hi

ve /

G et

ty Im

ag es

.

C on

T an

as iu

k/ D

es ig

n P

ic s

In c/

A la

m y

S

to ck

P ho

to .

Lu cy

N ic

ho ls

on /T

ho m

so n

R eu

te rs

(M

ar ke

ts ) L

LC .

Constructing the Problem

How much economic inequality is fair?

The richest 20 percent of U.S. families earn almost as much as the remaining 80 percent combined; the richest 1 percent of families control 40 percent of the country’s wealth.

Do you think U.S. society is becoming more equal?

In recent decades, income inequality in the United States has increased. The richest 1 percent of families own a larger share of wealth than at any time over the last fifty years.

Is there significant poverty in the United States?

In 2016, 40.6 million people were counted as poor.

Learning Objectives

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 33

Tracking the Trends

Survey Question: "How much opportunity does the average person have to get ahead?"

Year

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

1952 1998 2011 2013 2016

P er

ce n

ta g

e R

es p

o n

d in

g

“Not much opportunity”

“Plenty of opportunity”

SOURCE: Gallup (2016).

One of the defining qualities of U.S. society has always been providing opportunity for people to get ahead through their own effort. For decades, the Gallup organization has asked survey questions about how much opportunity our country provides. Here are two such questions:

Some people say there’s not much opportunity in America today—that the average person doesn’t have much chance to really get ahead. Others say there’s plenty of opportunity and anyone who works hard can go as far as they want. Which comes closer to the way you feel about this?

Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with the opportunity for a person in this nation to get ahead by working hard?

In 1952, 87 percent of U.S. adults expressed the view that “there is plenty of opportunity” in the United States. As recently as 1998, 81 percent of people agreed with this view. In the following decade, however, this confidence erod- ed and just 52 percent held the same view in 2013 with a modest increase to 70 percent by 2016. The flip side of this trend is that, back in 1952, just 8 percent of adults claimed that “there is not much opportunity.” By 1998, that share had more than doubled, and by 2013, 43 percent were dissatisfied with the oppor- tunity for a person to get ahead. The latest data for 2016 show that 28 percent of people say they feel this way. Over the long term, then, people are far less confident about the chances to get ahead.

34 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

Chapter Overview How unequal is U.S. society in terms of income and wealth? This chapter documents the extent of economic inequality and describes the contrasting lives of this country’s rich and poor. You will analyze a range of problems—including poor health, unsafe hous- ing, and political alienation—that are linked to poverty. You will learn what our society has done—and has not done—to assist the poor over the course of our nation’s history. Finally, you will carry out theoretical analysis of social inequality and learn how political attitudes guide people to construct certain “problems” and favor certain “solutions.”

in a clean but decades-old trailer in Buena Vista Mobile Home Park, paying $800 a month to rent a site.

Sandra and Roberto were drawn to Palo Alto by the city’s schools, which are among the best in the country. They knew that graduating from the local high school would give their daughters an excellent chance to get a college education and to have a much richer life than their parents have known.

But the family’s future in Palo Alto suddenly became un- certain. The mobile home park, like all the local land, had be- come very valuable. The park owners decided to sell the land to a group of investors who planned to close the mobile home park and build luxury apartments. In 2014, after a hearing that included statements by both park owners and park resi- dents, the city officials decided to allow the park to be closed and the land sold. That decision meant that the roughly 400 people in Buena Vista would be forced to find other housing with assistance by the park owners and the city.

Many residents of the larger community were concerned that closing this neighborhood—in which 80 percent of the people were Hispanic and almost all had relatively low

Twelve-year-old Jennifer Muñoz Tello keeps an eye on her two-year-old sister as she looks down the street hoping to see a friend come out to join her. On this June afternoon in Palo Alto, California, the girls enjoy the sunshine in front of the trailer where they live with their mother, Sandra, and their father, Roberto. Sandra works long days cleaning houses, and Roberto works almost until sundown in construction.

The Muñoz Tello family is not like most of the people who live in their community. Palo Alto has a median in- come of about $137,000, making it one of the richest cities in the United States. Many of the local people drive BMWs, Audis, or one of the new Tesla electric cars. The average home sells for about $2 million. This affluence is rooted in the computer revolution, which transformed the whole Silicon Valley region into an economic growth machine.

This widespread affluence hides the reality of people like Jennifer and her family, who earn barely enough to meet the high cost of living. Sandra could never hope to live in one of the houses she cleans or one of the new homes that Roberto helps to build. The Muñoz Tello family lives

Jerzy Dabrowski/Picture-alliance/Dpa/AP Images.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 35

striking contrast to small homes in need of repair across town. Some children dress in the latest styles, eat nutritious meals, have regular checkups at the doctor, and go on vacations to destinations around the world. But others wear hand-me- downs, eat unhealthy food, go to the emergency room when they are injured or sick, and rarely travel anywhere.

These patterns are just some of the consequences of social stratification, society’s system of ranking categories of people in a hierarchy. Stratification produces social classes, cat- egories of people who have similar access to resources and opportu- nities. Being born into a particular social class affects people’s life chances, including how much schooling they receive, the kind of work they will do (or their chances of not finding a job), and even how long they will live. Social stratification is a powerful system, and few people realize just how eco- nomically unequal people in the United States really are. We begin, then, with some important economic indicators.

Inequality of Income and Wealth Any discussion of economic inequality must begin with a look at inequality in income, salary or wages from a job plus earnings from investments and other sources. According to the U.S. government, the median family income—that is, the middle case of all families when ranked by income—was $67,871 in 2016.

As the pie chart in Figure 2–1 shows, the highest- earning 20 percent of U.S. families with income of at least

incomes—would wipe out most of Palo Alto’s low- income housing and diminish the town’s social diversity. For Jennifer and her sister, the thought of having to move had a more personal consequence—threatening their dreams for the future (Westervelt, 2013; City of Palo Alto, 2016).

In 2017, with widespread community support, the city acted to purchase the park’s land and place it under the Housing Authority of Santa Clara County. The homes of the Buena Vista families have been saved (Kurhi, 2017).

Economic differences can be found in every community across the United States, and often the differences are strik- ing. Just as importantly, economic inequality in the United States is increasing. This chapter examines poverty and wealth in this country, explaining how income and wealth are distributed. We begin with some basic facts about the un- equal distribution of economic resources in the United States.

Economic Inequality in the United States 2.1 Describe the distribution of income and wealth in

the United States.

It doesn’t take a sociologist to point out that some people have much more money than others. The evidence of economic inequality is everywhere: Large, fancy houses with swim- ming pools and workout rooms in one neighborhood stand in

49.2%

9.2%

3.7%

Share of All U.S. Income Received by Each 20% of Families (2016)

Share of Population

Minimum Annual Family Income

>$0100

Poorest 20%Fourth 20%Second 20%Richest 20% of families Third 20 %

0.1% $ 2,220,000

1 $ 481,000

5 $ 251,000

10 $ 200,000

20 $ 140,000

30 $ 125,000

40 $ 90,000

50 $ 72,000

60 $ 58,000

70 $ 43,000

80 $ 32,000

90 $ 20,000

22.9%

15.0%

Diversity Snapshot Figure 2–1 Distribution of Income in the United States

Income is unequally distributed, with the highest-earning one-fifth of U.S. families receiving 49.2 percent of all income. This is more than thirteen times as much as the 3.7 percent of income earned by the bottom one-fifth of U.S. families.

SOURCES: Internal Revenue Service (2017) and U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

36 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

19 80

19 82

19 84

19 86

19 88

19 90

19 92

19 94

19 96

19 98

20 00

20 02

20 04

20 06

20 08

20 10

20 12

20 14

20 16

1$222,869

1$102,863

1$30,104

1$14,416

1$417

1$6,226

Year

C o

n st

an t

20 16

D o

lla rs

Top 5 percent

Richest fifth

Fourth fifth

Second fifth

Poorest fifth

Third fifth

Figure 2–2 Mean Annual Income for U.S Families, 1980–2016 (in 2016 dollars, adjusted for inflation)

The highest-income families are now earning much more than they did in 1980, while average families have seen only small gains. The lowest-income families actually earned little more in 2016 than in 1980.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2018).

$140,000 in 2016 and with an average (mean) of $239,486 received 49.2 percent of all income. At the other end of the hierarchy, the lowest-paid 20 percent with income below $32,000 in 2016 and averaging $18,202 received just 3.7 percent of all income. Comparing these categories, we see that the high-income families earned more than thirteen times as much as the low-income families. From another angle, the highest-earning 20 percent of families earned nearly as much as the remaining 80 percent of fam- ilies combined (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018).

The table in Figure 2–1 gives a more detailed look at the U.S. income distribution. In 2016, families in the top 10 percent earned at least $200,000, those in the top 5 percent earned at least $251,000, and families in the top 1 percent received about $481,000. At the very top, in 2016, the highest-paid one-tenth of 1 percent of families earned at least $2.2 mil- lion. This means that a very small share of families earn as much money in a single year as a typical family earns in an entire lifetime.

Since about 1980, income inequality among U.S. fami- lies has been increasing. As shown in Figure 2–2, between 1980 and 2016, the annual income of the highest-paid

20  percent of U.S. families (about half of the families included in this category in 1980 were still there in 2016) increased by 75 percent (from an average of $136,624 to $239,486). During this period, people in the middle of the income distribution typically saw gains of about 25 percent. The lowest-paid 20 percent of U.S. families, however, increased by just 2 percent, making an average of $417 more in 2016 than they earned in 1980. In short, economic gains have been huge for the rich and small for average families. But the lowest-earning families today are living on about the same money that they were thirty years ago. Based on government data, income inequality is now greater than at any time in the past fifty years (U.S. Census Bureau, 2018). What do people think of this   trend? The Social Problems in Focus box provides some answers.

Economic inequality in the United States is even greater when it comes to wealth, the value of all the eco- nomic assets owned by a person or family minus any debts. Wealth is made up of more than money earned; it also includes the value of homes, automobiles, stocks, bonds, real estate, and businesses. Figure 2–3 shows

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 37

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN FOCUS

Increasing Economic Inequality: When Does It Become a Problem? In the poorest communities in the United States—such as rural Clay County, Georgia; Brooks County, Texas; and Holmes County, Mississippi—the typical household manages to earn barely $20,000 a year. In a rich community such as Palo Alto, California, the average family earns eight time this much. And in the richest communities—such as urban Greenwich, Connecticut; Jupiter Island, Florida; and Winnetka, Illinois—the typical household earns more than ten times that much.

In 2016, the average compensation of the 350 largest company corporate chief executive officers (CEOs) in the United States was $15.6 million (they earned more money in just two days than the average worker earned all year). The very highest-paid people in the country—the twenty-five top-earning investment fund managers on Wall Street—averaged $436 million each in income, any on of them earning more than all of Vermont’s public school teachers and more than 1,100 times the salary paid to the country’s president (Vermont Agency of Education, 2015; Mishel & Schieder, 2017; Vardi, 2017; White House, 2017).

In any organization, we might well expect the people in charge to earn more than ordinary workers. For example, public high school principals earn 1.5 times as much as public high school teachers. Similarly, hospital CEOs earn about 2.5 times as much as the average hospital physician. The presidents of small liberal arts colleges earn about 4 times as much as the faculty who teach there. But the income gap can get huge in

the corporate world and on Wall Street. The CEOs of investment banks earn 20 times as much as the typical investment banker. Among the largest 500 corporations, CEOs earn almost 100 times as much as typical middle managers. And the 25 top hedge-fund managers on Wall Street earn more than 2,800 times as much as the average investment fund manager (and more than 20,000 times as much as the average U.S. worker).

Survey data indicate that an increasing share of U.S. adults have real concerns about economic inequality and the extent of opportunity for all. As we noted in the beginning of this chapter, a slight majority of people say there is opportunity for people who work hard, but this share is lower than it was several generations ago. Almost half (45 percent) of U.S. adults now say that our society is “divided into two groups, the ‘haves’ and the ‘have-nots’.” When asked about the gap between middle- class people and rich people, 70 percent of adults correctly say that differences are greater than they were ten years ago.

Anyone who paid attention to the 2016 presidential campaign knows that—at least among Democrats—economic inequality is now widely defined as a serious social problem. In addition, when researchers asked people to respond to the statement “differences in income in America are too large,” 63 percent of U.S. adults agreed, 20 percent said they neither agreed nor disagreed, and 16 percent disagreed (the remaining 1 percent had no opinion). Similarly, when asked if “there is

that the wealthiest 20 percent of U.S. families own about 88 percent of all privately held wealth. Near the top, the very rich—those in the top 5 percent—own 65 percent of all  wealth, and the super-rich, in the top 1 percent, control 40 percent of all private assets (Wolff, 2014; Ingraham, 2017).

The second 20 percent of U.S. families own about 9 percent of all wealth. People in this category own some stocks and bonds, but most of their wealth is in the form of home equity and the value of automobiles and other consumer goods. Looking at the entire economic hierar- chy, however, we see that about half of all U.S. families have barely any wealth at all. In other words, most ordi- nary families own a home and other personal property, but the value of these assets is roughly balanced by what they owe in home mortgages, car loans, and credit card debt. This fact means that most families live from paycheck to paycheck and lack cash reserves to carry them through an emergency. In a world in which illness or unemployment can strike unexpectedly, many families are only a paycheck or two away from poverty.

Percentage of All U.S. Wealth

Second 20 percent: 9.3%

Third 20 percent: 2.7% Fourth 20

percent: 0.5%

Richest 20 percent of families:

88.9%

Diversity Snapshot Figure 2–3 Distribution of Wealth in the United States

Wealth is distributed much more unequally than income is. The richest one-fifth of U.S. families control 88.9 percent of all privately owned wealth; the poorest one-fifth of families have no wealth and are actually in debt.

SOURCE: Wolff (2014).

38 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

10 percent of all income. But by 1980, economic inequal- ity was increasing once again. The top 1 percent earned a larger and larger share of all income, peaking in 2007 at almost the same level as just before the Great Depression.

The United States has always embraced a way of life that emphasizes competitive individualism, and so most people accept the idea that people’s rewards should reflect their talents, abilities, and efforts. But most people now say that our country’s economic differences are too large (Smith et al., 2015). Even more disturbing, other surveys find that a large majority of people in the United States believe that our economic system is unfairly “rigged” so that “the rich get richer and the poor get poorer” (Morin, 2012; Pew Research Center, 2012).

We know that many well-known people earn a lot of money. Entertainers like Katy Perry (who earns about $135 million a year) and Jay Z ($42 million), as well as athletes LeBron James ($72 million) and Maria Sharapova ($30  million), earn far more money in a year than the rest of us are likely to see in a lifetime.

But is income always a good measure of talent, ability, and effort? In 2017, Clayton Kershaw of the Los Angeles Dodgers topped the income scale of all major league ball- players with $33 million in earnings. Even the legendary Yankee Babe Ruth—arguably the greatest ballplayer of all time—earned only $80,000 (or $1.1 million in today’s dollars) in his highest-paid seasons (1930 and 1931).

In recent years, Democratic politicians (especially 2016 presidential candidate Bernie Sanders) have called attention to the very high pay that goes to some people— especially the leaders of large corporations. In 2016, Tim Cook, CEO of Apple, was the highest-earning CEO, receiving total compensation of $150 million in salary, bonus, stock options, and other perks. That year, the country’s ten highest-paid CEOs averaged more than $76 million each in earnings.

Rising CEO pay is an important dimension of increas- ing economic inequality. Back in 1970, the compensa- tion of top CEOs was about 40 times what the average company employee earned. By 2016, top CEOs earned 271 times more than the average worker. This upward trend shows no signs of ending: In 2016, these top earn- ers saw their pay increase by about another 4 percent,

P er

ce n

ta g

e o

f A

ll In

co m

e E

ar n

ed b

y th

e R

ic h

es t

1%

19241913 1937 1950 1963 1976 1989 2002 2015

0%

3%

5%

8%

10%

13%

15%

18%

20%

23%

25%

28%

30%

Figure 2–4 Share of All U.S. Income Earned by the Richest 1 Percent, 1913–2015

In 1929, the richest 1 percent of the U.S. population earned almost one-fourth of all income. For several decades after that, the richest 1 percent’s share of income declined. But by 1980, this share began to increase, peaking in 2007 at almost the 1929 level. The share fell during the recent recession but then increased again to 22 percent in 2015.

SOURCE: Saez and Piketty (2016).

too much power in the hands of a few rich people and large corporations,” 77 percent of U.S. adults agreed that this was the case, and just 19 percent disagreed (again, the remainder had no opinion). These responses are even more striking when we keep in mind that the actual level of economic inequality is much greater than the average person thinks it is (Pew Research Center, 2013; Bloomberg News, 2015; Gallup, 2015; Smith et al., 2015).

What Do You Think? 1. In your opinion, are economic differences in the United

States too big or not?

2. What evidence can you point to that economic inequality is harmful to community life in this country?

3. What action, if any, should government take to address eco- nomic inequality?

The Trend toward Increasing Economic Inequality In recent decades, the United States has experienced a rising level of economic inequality. In fact, economic inequality in this country has reached levels not seen since 1929, just before the Great Depression. As shown in Figure 2–4, the 1920s was a decade that saw steady gains in income for the highest- earning 1 percent of the population who, just before the stock market crash, received almost 25 percent of all income.

As the Great Depression came to an end, the eco- nomic trend in the United States reversed itself and began to move toward greater income equality. By the 1970s, as the figure shows, the richest 1 percent received less than

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 39

the government uses taxes to discourage certain types of behavior; for example, high taxes on cigarettes discourage smoking by making tobacco more expensive. Third, and most important to this discussion, taxation can be a tool to redistribute income and to reduce economic inequality.

The government reduces economic inequality using a system of progressive taxation, a policy that raises tax rates as income increases. This idea is a modern-day version of the story of Robin Hood, with government taking more from the rich in taxes and giving more to the poor in assis- tance and benefits. As shown in Table 2–1, the 1 percent of 2015 tax returns reporting the highest income ($480,930 or more) ended up paying 27 percent of this income in fed- eral income taxes (federal inheritance taxes, state and local income taxes, and all sales taxes are not included in this figure). The top 10 percent of tax returns (reporting income of $138,031 or more) paid 21 percent of earnings in fed- eral taxes. The bottom 50 percent of tax returns (reporting income of $39,274 or less) paid just 4 percent of earnings in federal taxes. Under this progressive system, families with lower incomes pay at a lower rate and receive more financial benefits from the government, and those with high incomes pay at a higher rate and receive fewer bene- fits. When all deductions and benefits are considered, 77.5 million U.S. households (45.3 percent of the total) paid no federal income tax at all in 2015 (even so, most of these households paid a payroll tax and state or local income taxes) (Tax Policy Center, 2015).

Looking at dollars rather than rates, income tax returns filed by people earning more than $480,930 (the top- earning 1 percent) show an average payment of $402,038 in federal income tax. Households earning less than $39,274 (the bot- tom 50 percent of tax returns) show an average tax bill of $582. Rich families, who on average earn ninety-eight times more than lower-income families, pay almost 700 times more in federal income tax. In other words, our country’s progressive system taxes the rich seven times more heav- ily than lower-income people, which has the consequence of redistributing money and reducing income inequality (Luhby, 2011; Internal Revenue Service, 2017).

more than the 1.1 percent increase received by the aver- age U.S. worker (Mishel & Schieder, 2017; Social Security Administration, 2017).

Defenders of such high earnings claim that companies pay what it takes to attract the most talented people to top leadership. A baseball pitcher in the major leagues may be just marginally better than a farm-team pitcher, but even a small difference helps win games and is important enough to warrant much higher pay. Similarly, in the corporate world, having the best leaders can help a company perform better (Fishman & Sullivan, 2013). But critics counter that com- pany performance is not clearly linked to CEO rewards. For example, studies have found that some of the highest-paid CEOs have some of the worst performance records and half of the companies paying top salaries to CEOs actually lost money during that year (Helman, 2011; Adams, 2014).

What about the rest of us? Do people who play by the rules and work hard at their jobs have the opportu- nity to get ahead? The idea that those willing to make the effort can earn economic security and expect to improve social standing over time is at the heart of the American dream. In recent decades, while people at the top of the income hierarchy have been generously rewarded, average people who work hard have been struggling to hang on to what they have. With good-paying jobs harder to find, it is not surprising that the share of people who say that they believe their family can achieve the American dream declined, and confidence is lowest among people with the least schooling (Gallup, 2013; Smith, 2017).

Taxation Taxation is an important government policy that affects income inequality. The government levies a tax on what we earn and what we buy for three major reasons. First, taxes provide the government with the money it needs to operate. Taxes not only fund the salaries of government employees, including members of the military, but also pay for projects that benefit the public, such as building roads, repairing bridges, and operating schools. Second,

Table 2–1 Progressive Federal Tax on Income, 2015

SOURCE: Internal Revenue Service (2017).

Share of Population Adjusted Gross Income on Tax Return Number of Tax Returns Average Tax Rate Share of Total Income Tax

Top 0.1% $2,220,264 or more 141,205 27% 19%

Top 1% 480,930 or more 1,412,046 27 39

Top 5% 195,778 or more 7,060,231 24 60

Top 10% 138,031 or more 14,120,463 21 71

Top 25% 79,655 or more 35,301,156 18 87

Top 50% 39,275 or more 70,602,313 16 97

Bottom 50% 39,274 or less 70,602,313 4 3

40 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

The Rich and the Poor: A Social Profile 2.2 Assess differences in the lives of the rich and the

poor in the United States.

President Obama (2013) has called economic inequality the “defining challenge of our time.” The foundation for this claim is the fact that the differences between the rich and the poor are greater today than they have been for many decades. Of course, most families in this country are neither rich nor poor. But to sharpen your understanding of the extent of eco- nomic inequality in U.S. society and to better understand the differences that economic standing makes, we now take a brief look at the two extremes: the rich and the poor.

The Rich There is no standard definition of what it means to be rich. To many of us, the rich are people who have a good bit more than we do. A reasonable definition for this category of the population might be people with family income in the top 10 percent of the distribution. By this standard, a rich family has an income of at least $170,000 a year. Many men and women with incomes in this range are successful in corporate life and operating their own businesses; others are physicians, lawyers, and college deans and presidents (although rarely college professors). Over their working lives, a good portion of the rich will become millionaires. There are about 10.4 mil- lion households (about 9 percent of the total) in the United States with at least $1 million in investment assets excluding the value of a home. If one counts home values, the number of millionaires is several times higher (Frank, 2016).

Well-off people typically live in large and well- appointed homes, wear expensive clothes, and enjoy the high regard of people around them. Many in this cate- gory also have the power to make a difference—they have access to political leaders, and they are decision mak- ers in their own right as members of governing boards of businesses and community organizations. High up in this elite category, we find a number of names familiar to people across the country and around the world. Oprah Winfrey, for example, is one of the highest-paid people on television and a highly successful businesswoman whose net worth has soared to somewhere in the range of $3 billion (Alexander, 2017). Donald Trump earns $400,000 a year as president—far below the roughly $75 million Winfrey earns each year—but he, too, has a net worth of about $3 billion.

An estimate for 2017 placed the wealth of the ten rich- est individuals in the United States at more than $610 bil- lion, which is as much as the wealth of 10 million average people at $61,000 each. Put another way, the nation’s ten richest people have more assets than the combined wealth

At the very top of the income pyramid, people earn- ing $2.2 million or more per year (who average $7.5 mil- lion) typically paid about $2 million in federal income taxes (Internal Revenue Service, 2017). The top one-tenth of 1 percent of households in terms of income paid 19 percent of all income taxes collected by the federal gov- ernment, and the bottom half of all U.S. households paid only 3 percent of all federal taxes. This contrast helps us see that income taxes, including tax cuts or tax increases, typically have the biggest dollar effect on high-income households.

Knowing this fact, many high-income people make use of various legal strategies to lower their income taxes. For example, executives may ask corporations to defer some income until a later time when it will trigger less tax, or wealthy people may make charitable contributions that, under the tax law, they can use to reduce their taxable income.

Because high-income people must also pay a share of any inheritance that passes from one generation to the next, they make use of policies such as trusts and tax-free annual gifts to reduce these taxes. The 2017 tax law passed by Congress and supported by the Trump administration provides enormous benefits to wealthy families because it doubles the amount of wealth that is exempt from estate taxes from $5.5 million to $11 million for an unmarried person, or $22 million for a married couple (Sahadi, 2018).

But, even without special strategies, many very high-income people pay only about 15 to 20 percent of their income in taxes. This low tax rate reflects the fact that many of the very rich make most of their money not from salaries or profits (which are taxed at a top rate of 37 percent) but from investment or “unearned” income and capital gains, which is taxed at no more than 20 per- cent. So any one person’s tax rate depends on not only the level of income but also the source of the income (Johnston, 2005; Moore & Anderson, 2005; Ohlemacher, 2011; Internal Revenue Service, 2017).

So how much does our progressive system of taxation actually reduce income inequality? The answer is “some- what.” One recent study concluded that income inequal- ity with progressive taxation is about 20 percent less than it would be without it. In other words, progressive taxa- tion does make a difference, but not all that much (Wessel, 2015). Therefore, increasing the tax rate on high incomes (from the current top rate of 37 percent to, say, 50 percent) would further reduce income inequality but only by a few percent (Orszag, 2015; Frankel, 2017).

Finally, keep in mind that not all government taxes are progressive. The tax on gasoline or cigarettes, for example, is a set amount per gallon or pack purchased. Although everyone pays the same tax on the sale, these taxes are regressive because a fixed tax takes a bigger bite out of lower-income budgets.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 41

lived in a household with income below the official pov- erty line, not counting the value of benefits such as food stamps, Medicaid, and public housing.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture set the poverty line to represent an annual income three times greater than what a family has to spend in order to eat a basic, nutri- tious diet. Every year, government officials adjust this dol- lar amount to reflect the changing cost of living. In 2016, the poverty line for a nonfarm family of four was $24,563. Poverty thresholds by family size are shown in Table 2–2.

The U.S. government uses what might be called an abso- lute poverty line—one directly linked to the cost of a basic diet. European governments, by contrast, use a relative pov- erty line, one set at 60 percent of the median income level. What does this difference in defining “poverty” mean? In the United States, poverty is defined as a condition in which people may not have enough to get by. How everyone else is doing does not figure in to the poverty rate. In Europe, where there is greater concern for the degree of economic inequal- ity, poverty is seen as a relative condition that prevents peo- ple from being able to fully participate in social life because they have much less income than everyone else. If the United States were to use the European standard, the poverty line for a family of four would be about $50,000 and our poverty rate would be almost three times as high at about 35 percent.

With the poverty line set so low, how easily can a fam- ily live on this level of income? Anyone who lives with this limited income knows that it is extremely difficult. Some analysts suggest that, to reach a minimum level of eco- nomic security, a U.S. family would need income at least 25 percent higher than the poverty line—something a step or two closer to the European standard. Some organiza- tions go even further. A recent calculation by the Economic Policy Institute (2016) estimates that a two-parent family with two children living in a low-income region (such as Laredo, Texas) would require an income of about $57,000— more than double the government’s poverty line—in order

of the entire populations of Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Connecticut. For some years, the richest of the rich has been Bill Gates, a founder of Microsoft Corporation and its single largest shareholder. Gates, is worth roughly $89 billion, which equals the wealth of about 1.5 million ordinary people, or roughly the entire population of Montana. In 2018, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos surpassed Gates, amassing wealth that is estimated to be in excess of $100 billion (Wolff, 2014; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015, 2018; Metcalf, 2018).

Which categories of people are most likely to be rich? In general, older people have the most wealth because earnings rise through middle age and savings increase over time. Men have more wealth than women do, a pat- tern detailed in Chapter 4 (“Gender Inequality”), because, on average, a larger share of men work full time and, when they do, they earn 21 percent more than comparable women. Married couples out-earn single people because most of these couples benefit from double incomes and they save money by sharing their living expenses. Finally, white people in the United States fare better than people of color. The Census Bureau (2018) reports that 61 percent of white families earn $50,000 or more annually, compared with just 48 percent of Hispanic families and 41 percent of African American families.

Should we define the rich as a social problem? On one hand, the rich are successful people, many of whom are living the American dream. Understandably, many people see such achievement as good. On the other hand, a society that distributes opportunity and wealth so unequally also leaves others behind: the poor.

The Poor In this nation of great wealth, tens of millions of people living in cities and in rural areas scratch out a living on too little income. Every day across the United States, tens of millions of families struggle to get needed food, to pay the monthly rent, and to stay healthy. Many poor fami- lies experience the same daily struggle that is common in low-income countries in Latin America, Africa, and Asia. (A full discussion of global poverty and hunger is found in Chapter 16, “Population and Global Inequality.”)

The Poverty Line How many people in the United States are poor? Back in 1964, when the federal government launched a “war on poverty,” officials devised what they called the poverty line, an income level set by the U.S. govern- ment for the purpose of counting the poor. The poverty line rep- resents a dollar amount of annual income below which the government defines a person or family as “poor” and eli- gible for government assistance. In 2016, some 40.6  million people were counted among the poor, resulting in a poverty rate of 12.7 percent of the U.S. population. These people

Table 2–2 U.S. Government Poverty Threshold, by Family Type, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Family Size Annual Household Income

One person $12,228

Two persons 15,569

Three persons 19,105

Four persons 24,563

Five persons 29,111

Six persons 32,928

Seven persons 37,458

Eight persons 41,781

Nine or more persons 49,721

42 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

yourself to what extent a family can meet basic needs on income at the poverty line.

The Poverty Gap The poverty line in the United States is set below a level that provides adequate income for fam- ilies. Yet most poor families in the United States live on much less than poverty line income. The poverty gap is the difference between the actual income of the typical poor house- hold and the official poverty line. The poverty gap has been growing in recent years.

Considerable evidence suggests what poor peo- ple already know—it is very difficult to live on poverty line income. But the problem is worse than that. In 2016, 18.5 million people (45.6 percent of all those in poverty)

“to secure an adequate but modest living standard.” In a high-income region (such as New York City), this same family would need about $100,000 in annual income. Averaging across the United States, such a family would require about $66,000 in annual income, which is about the national median figure.

Based on such data, critics echo many of the poor themselves by saying that the government should raise the poverty line to increase benefits to low-income people. These analysts claim that the government sets the poverty line at a very low level in order to make the poverty prob- lem seem smaller. Yet this same policy harms the interests of the poor (Lichter & Crowley, 2002; Economic Policy Institute, 2016). The Personal Stories box lets you see for

PERSONAL STORIES

The Reality of Poverty: Living on the Edge Zach Perkins, who lives in Richmond, Indiana, knows how hard it is to live at the poverty line. Zach had worked for seven years building school buses in a nearby factory before he was laid off eighteen months ago. He now looks after seven- year-old twins Michael and Sonya while Sandy Perkins, his wife, works in a fast-food restaurant. Sandy barely earns the minimum wage—she averages $7.50 an hour—for forty- eight hours each week, year-round, for an annual income of $18,720. Zach earns another $500 per month doing part-time work, which boosts the family’s total annual earnings to about $24,720, just above the official poverty line for a family of four, which in 2016 was $24,563.

To buy food, the Perkins family budgets $6,000, almost one-third of their income, which amounts to $16 per day. For this amount to provide three meals for four people, the family can spend just $1.25 per meal. “You know,” says Sandy with a painful look, “that’s not even enough to eat in the Burger King where I work.” Although it is enough to buy low-cost foods (such as spaghetti, beans, and eggs), it is not enough to buy meals with wholesome meat and fresh vegetables.

If the family manages to stay within their annual food budget, they will have to meet all their other expenses for the year with $15,000, or about $1,250 per month. Their monthly rent on a simple but adequate mobile home is $700 (they were lucky to find a rental unit well below the national average rent level of about $850). But they also have to pay for utilities, including gas, electricity, and water, and these add another $200 monthly. Sandy also needs a car to get to work, and the gasoline, insurance, and repairs for their old Honda add another $200 to their monthly total. So far, total expenses come to $1,100, leaving the Perkins family with $150 (about $5 per day) to cover the cost of clothes for the entire family; everyone’s medical and dental care; repairs on the washing machine,

television, and other home appliances; school supplies and toys for the children; and other household items. Obviously, the family goes without most of these things.

At this income level, the family also has little money for entertainment, child care, or music lessons for the children. Zach and Sandy were glad to see the price of gas come down during the past year, but with the economy doing so badly, Zach has more trouble finding work, and Sandy is fearful that she could lose her job. Even if their income stays at the current level, they realize that sending a child to college or someday owning their home seems out of the question. “I have to be very careful with my clothes,” jokes Zach. “By the time I can afford new ones, these will probably be back in style.”

Zach knows how hard it is to make ends meet. But he adds firmly, “This family will never ask for a handout.” Seated across the room, Sandy nods in agreement. Like everyone else, the poor are proud, even if they are barely able to pay their bills.

Can a family in the United States survive at the poverty level? Barely. Getting by month to month demands careful attention to every dollar spent. It also requires a bit of luck: The family must avoid unplanned expenses, which means everyone must manage to stay healthy. “Am I sure we can get by?” Zach wonders, looking down at the floor. “I guess not. But I do know one thing: We have to try.”

What Do You Think? 1. Can a family survive on an income near the poverty line?

Why or why not?

2. In what ways does growing up in a poor family limit the chances of children to succeed as adults?

3. Would you support policies or programs to assist a family like this? What should be done?

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 43

In 1960, most poor families contained both men and women; today, by contrast, 51 percent of poor families are headed by a woman with no husband present, and just 11 percent are headed by a single man (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Family Patterns Marriage allows partners to combine incomes and share expenses, which helps to build income and wealth. Therefore, being married greatly reduces the risk of being poor. The poverty rate for married people is 5.1 percent compared with 21 percent for unmarried indi- viduals (the majority of whom are women) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Why are single women with children at higher risk of poverty? Because many single women (but rarely single men) stay at home to care for their children or because they cannot afford the child care they need to go to work. For all single mothers, the poverty rate in 2016 was 27 percent. Single minority women with children bear an added risk: About 37 percent of single, African American mothers and 34 percent of single, Hispanic mothers had incomes below the poverty line. If the mother is also young and has not completed high school, poverty is almost a certainty (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Region The official poverty rate varies from state to state, from a low of 6.6 percent in New Hampshire and 8.3 percent in Minnesota to a high of 21.8 percent in New Mexico. By region, the South (14.1 percent) and the West (12.8 percent) have higher poverty rates, followed by the Midwest (11.7 percent) and the Northeast (10.8 percent) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

reported family income that was below half of their pov- erty threshold (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). In human terms, this poverty gap means greater hardship caused by poverty.

Who Are the Poor? A Closer Look In 2016, the federal government counted 40.6 million men, women, and children—12.7 percent of the U.S. population—as poor. As shown in Figure 2–5, the pov- erty rate was 22 percent in 1960, it fell to about 12 percent by the mid-1970s, and the rate has risen and fallen since then. Economic downturns, like the one that began in 2008, increase unemployment and raise the poverty rate. Economic expansion, as we have seen in the last two years, brings the poverty rate down.

As you might expect, the categories of people at greatest risk of being poor differ from those most likely to be rich. We can profile the poor in the United States according to age, race, gender, family patterns, and residence.

Age The age category at greatest risk of poverty is children, who make up one-third of the U.S. poor. In 2016, 13.3 million young people under the age of eighteen (33  percent of the total) were living in poor households. More seriously, 32 percent of these children lived in fam- ilies with incomes no more than half the poverty line ($12,000 or less for a family of four). A generation ago, the elderly were most likely to be poor. Today, however, pov- erty wears a youthful face, as the Diversity: Race, Class, & Gender box explains.

Race Many people in the United States link being poor with being African American or Hispanic. But far more white people than black people are poor, and more non-Hispanic than Hispanic people live in poverty.

It is true that the percentage of minority people who are poor is higher than that of whites. In 2016, 22 percent of African Americans (9.2 million people), 19.4 percent of Hispanics (11.1 million people), and 10.1 percent of Asian Americans (1.9 million people) were poor, compared with 8.8 percent of non-Hispanic whites (17.2 million people). Therefore, African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Americans are at higher risk of being poor than whites. This is why more than half of all poor people in the United States fall into one or more of these disadvantaged catego- ries (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Gender Women, too, are at greater risk of poverty. Fifty-six percent of all U.S. adults who are poor are women, and 44 percent are men. The gender gap has become so large that sociologists speak of the feminization of poverty to refer to the trend of women making up an increasing share of the poor.

P er

ce n

ta g

e in

P o

ve rt

y

Year

1960 1968 1976 1984 1992 2000 2008 2016 0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

22%

24%

Figure 2–5 The Poverty Rate in the United States, 1960-2016

The poverty rate declined sharply in the 1960s, rising and falling since then but always staying above 10 percent of the U.S. population.

SOURCE: Data from U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

44 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

Many people link poverty with the inner city. Most poor people—just like most affluent people—do live in urban areas. But as National Map 2–1 shows, rural areas have a greater share of the population living below the poverty level than do urban areas. Poverty is wide- spread across Appalachia (including West Virginia and Kentucky), along the Texas border with Mexico (where many new immigrants live), and in parts of the Great Plains and the Southwest (especially on American Indian lands). In 2016, some 15.8 percent of the rural population was poor compared with 12.2 percent for people in urban areas or, looking more closely, 15.9 percent of people in central cities and 10.0 percent of people in suburbs (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). Why do suburban areas show an advantage when it comes to income? By and large, pov- erty is lowest in areas that offer more jobs and more edu- cational opportunity.

Working Families: Working Harder Economic struggle is not limited to the poor. In recent decades, the American dream—the belief that with hard work, people can have a secure and improving way of life—has been shaken by some disturbing facts. Beginning about 1970, many U.S. families found themselves working harder than ever yet feeling that they were falling behind. The tough economy in recent years has only added to the

struggle. No one should be surprised that, in a recent sur- vey, the share of people who say they believe that there is plenty of opportunity in the United States has slipped from almost 90 percent back in 1952 to 70 percent in 2016 (Newport, 2016).

What’s going on? For some families, of course, times have never been better. But for a large share of work- ers, income has nearly stalled. The earnings of a typical fifty-year-old man working full time jumped 72 percent between 1958 and 1973 (from $31,277 to $55,605 in con- stant 2016 dollars). Between 1973 and 2016, however, this same worker’s income increased just 9 percent, to $60,614, so he had to work more hours to meet the rising costs of groceries, housing, college tuition, and medical care. Among younger workers, wage increases in recent decades have also been very small. This is one major rea- son that, in 2015, one in three women and men between the ages of eighteen and thirty-four was living with one or both parents. More broadly, young adults are taking longer—often well into their thirties—to establish lives independent of their parents (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017; Vespa, 2017).

Underlying this pattern of stalled or declining earnings are changes in the economy detailed in Chapter 12 (“Work and the Workplace”). During the second half of the nine- teenth century and the first half of the twentieth century, the Industrial Revolution helped the U.S. economy create

DIVERSITY: RACE, CLASS, & GENDER

The United States: A Land of Poor Children The United States is the richest country in the world. Even so, almost one child in five under the age of eighteen—13.3 million boys and girls—is poor. Since the “war on poverty” began in 1964, the nation has managed to cut poverty among senior citizens by about two-thirds (from 29 percent in 1966 to 9.3 percent in 2016). Yet the rate of child poverty has declined far less, from 23 percent in 1964 to 18 percent in 2016.

What is your mental picture of poor children? The common stereotype is of African American children living in an inner city with a teenage mother who is on welfare. The rate of child poverty is higher for minorities than for whites, but in terms of numbers, 62 percent of poor children are white (including some who are Hispanics), and 60 percent live not in inner cities but in other urban, suburban, and rural areas.

Why are so many children poor? Liberals point to the loss of good-paying jobs in the United States. In inner cities, where factories have closed, and in declining rural communities, many people simply cannot find good jobs. Conservatives note the role of family breakdown in the rising tide of poverty. They point out that 59 percent of poor children live with a single mother,

which they link to the fact that 70 percent of these households have no adult working full time (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Everyone agrees that children, wherever they live, are not to blame for their own poverty. Why, then, do we continue to tolerate their suffering? The moral case to care better for our children is compelling. There are practical reasons, too. Isn’t reducing the crushing experience of child poverty far easier and less costly than dealing with the problems that come later, such as unemployment, drug use, and crime?

What Do You Think? 1. Of the liberal and conservative explanations for the high rate

of child poverty, which makes more sense to you? Why?

2. Few people think children themselves are responsible for being poor. Why, then, isn’t there more popular support for increasing assistance to poor families with children?

3. As the unemployment rate increased rapidly during the recent recession, what do you think happened to the rate of child poverty? Why?

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 45

writer to spend several months in Florida, Maine, and Minnesota, pretending to be in need of work, taking whatever jobs she could find, and trying to live on what she earned. Ehrenreich found that it was not easy. At the end of her journey, she explained (2001:220):

I grew up hearing over and over . . . that hard work was the secret of success. “Work hard and you’ll get ahead” or “It’s hard work that got us where we are.” No one ever said that you could work hard—harder than you ever thought possible— and still find yourself sinking ever deeper into debt and poverty.

In 2016, according to the government, 10.6 percent of the heads of poor families worked full time, at least fifty weeks during the year, yet remained below the pov- erty line. The reason is that low-wage work—Ehrenreich worked as a waitress, motel room cleaner, and sales clerk

jobs with higher pay. This happened as low- paying farm jobs were replaced with higher-paying factory work. Since about 1950, as the Information Revolution has unfolded, most new jobs have been in the service sector, including sales positions, computer data processing, and food service jobs that pay less than the factory jobs they are replacing. At the same time, the economy has recovered from the recent recession, but companies have not replaced all the people they had laid off, relying on computer technology and part-time workers to keep their labor costs down. A lower demand for labor puts downward pressure on wages (Gordon, 2016; Krugman, 2016).

The Working Poor Barbara Ehrenreich, whose research is described in Chapter 1, wanted to see for herself what it is like to be a low-wage worker, so she left her comfortable life as a

Percentage of Population below the Poverty Level, 2014

32.6 and over

24.7% to 32.5%

19.6% to 24.6%

14.7% to 19.5%

11.1% to 14.6%

11.0% and under

U.S. average: 15.9%

Anna Mae Peters lives in Nitta Yuma, Mississippi. Almost everyone she knows lives below the government’s poverty line.

Julie Garland lives in Greenwich, Connecticut, where people have very high income and there is little evidence of poverty.

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA

NORTH DAKOTA

MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

LOUISIANA

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

WEST VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

UTAH

HAWAII

D.C.

ALASKA

Seeing Ourselves National Map 2–1 Poverty across the United States

This map shows that the poorest counties in the United States—where the poverty rate is more than twice the national average—are in Appalachia, spread across the Deep South, along the border with Mexico, near the Four Corners region of the Southwest, and in the Dakotas. Can you suggest some reasons for this pattern?

SOURCES: US Census Bureau, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE) Program 2017.

46 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

which means a big increase in the num- ber of nonworking poor. Elkhart, Indiana, the town that makes most of the nation’s recreational vehicles, is a case in point. When the economy turned down, sales of RVs fell, pushing the town’s unem- ployment rate above 20 percent (Wilson, 1996; O’Hare, 2002; Martin, 2009; U.S. Department of Labor, 2012).

The Underclass Poverty is most severe among the underclass, poor people who live in areas with high concentrations of poverty and limited opportunities for schooling or work. The largest concentration of people in the underclass is found in inner cities where people experience a condition sociologists call hypersegregation, being cut off from the larger society and hav-

ing no access to either good schools or good-paying jobs. This type of social isolation means that children grow up poor, and most remain poor as adults (Massey & Denton, 1989; Anderson, 1999).

Hypersegregation is also found in rural areas, which can be just as isolated from the larger world as the inner cities. Across the United States, the underclass includes perhaps one in seven poor people, or 1 to 2 percent of the total U.S. population.

For people who are part of the underclass, the real- ity of everyday life is persistent poverty. But most peo- ple in the United States who are poor are not part of the underclass. For the society as a whole, temporary poverty is more the rule. Over ten years, about one-fourth of the U.S. population falls below the poverty line, usually because of unemployment, illness, or divorce. When this happens, the typical pattern is for a household to remain poor for perhaps a year or two.

Whether poverty is a short-term or long-term experi- ence, it is rarely a problem that exists all by itself. On the contrary, poverty brings with it a wide range of additional challenges, which we shall now examine.

Problems Linked to Poverty 2.3 Analyze how poverty is linked to other social

problems.

When families lack the income needed for a safe and secure life, people suffer in many ways. The following sections take a closer look at six problems linked to poverty: poor health, substandard housing, homelessness, limited schooling, crime, and political alienation.

at a discount store—rarely pays much more than the fed- eral minimum hourly wage of $7.25 per hour, which was set back in 2009. In early 2019, the federal minimum wage was still at $7.25 an hour, but at least twenty-nine states have set a higher minimum wage, with Washington pay- ing the most at $11.50 and Massachusetts and California at $11.00 per hour. Some large employers including Walmart now pay at least $10 an hour and, in 2018, Amazon announced it would raise its minimum wage to $15. Keep in mind that $15 an hour means that full-time, year-round work yields just $28,800, about $4,200 ($350 per month) above the poverty line for a nonfarm family of four (National Conference of State Legislatures, 2018; Kline, 2018).

The Nonworking Poor Many poor families do not have a steady income from work. Government data show that in 2016, 62 percent of the heads of poor families did not work at all; another 28 percent remained poor while doing part-time work (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

There are many reasons for not working. Some peo- ple have a disability or other health problem; others lack the skills or self-confidence needed to hold a steady job. Some parents cannot afford to pay for child care because it costs more than they can earn at low-wage work. For many others, the problem is a lack of available employ- ment. Most inner-city areas in the United States offer few jobs. Similarly, many rural areas and small towns are in economic decline, with stores and factories that have closed their doors. The 2009 recession sent the unemploy- ment rate in many communities to 15 and even 20 percent,

One way that we know that poverty is a social problem rather than simply an individ- ual problem is by looking at poverty rates, which are very high in certain regions of the country. Economic opportunity is all but gone from a number of rural areas, especially in the Great Plains; as a result, entire communities suffer.

M ik

e G

ol dw

at er

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 47

years longer than poor women and wealthy men expect- ing to live fourteen years longer. In short, increasing income inequality in the United States has been accompa- nied by increasing differences in longevity between rich and poor (Congressional Budget Office, 2015; Bosworth, Burtless, & Zhang, 2016; Tavernise, 2016).

In global perspective, increasing economic inequal- ity has held down this country’s ranking in overall patterns of health. One recent study found that, of thirty-four high- income nations, the United States was ranked twenty-seventh in terms of life expectancy at birth (OECD, 2018).

Substandard Housing In the United States, good housing is available to those who can pay for it. For this reason, poor people take what is left, sometimes living in crowded homes containing dangerous lead-based paint, faulty plumbing, inadequate heating, and even collapsing foundations and crumbling ceilings.

Recent years have seen a steady decline in the num- ber of low-rent apartments in the United States. As a result, many poor families are forced to spend most of what they earn for housing, leaving too little for food, clothing, and other needs. In large cities across the United States, where economic inequality is greater than for the country as a whole, tens of thousands of poor people are on waiting lists for assistance in secur- ing housing. In some affluent communities, including Palo Alto, described in the chapter-opening story, there is little or no low-income housing (Westervelt, 2013; Berube & Holmes, 2016; National Low-Income Housing Coalition, 2017).

Not all people who face housing problems are poor. After the onset of the housing crisis that began about 2007, both lower-income and middle-income people struggled to hold onto housing. After years of rising values, housing prices fell dramatically, in some cases losing half or more of their previous value. With home values falling below the amount owed on a mortgage, many owners simply stopped making mortgage payments and walked away from their properties when banks foreclosed. Some states, including Florida, Arizona, and Nevada, experienced a full-blown crisis with a foreclosure rate more than five times the national average. This housing crisis reduced the wealth of many families and added to the struggle to hold on to good housing (Christie, 2011).

Homelessness In recent decades, the problem of homelessness, the plight of poor people who lack shelter and live primarily on the streets, has received a lot of attention. Researchers estimate that

Poor Health There is a strong link between income and health. In fact, there is a good deal of truth in the claim that “wealth means health.” Poverty, disease, and illness often go together.

Good nutrition is the foundation of a healthy life. Yet many poor people cannot afford nutritious foods. In 2016, about 12.3 percent of all U.S. households and one-third of poor households experienced “food insecurity” (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2018). But the challenges of living poor go beyond having enough healthful food. In addition, poverty breeds stress, encouraging the use of tobacco and alcohol and raising the risk of drug abuse and violence. Just as important, when illness or injury strikes, poor people have fewer resources, including health insur- ance, to fight back. As a result, poor people may put off seeking medical care. A common pattern is for poor people to show up at an emergency room facing a serious condi- tion that could have been cured easily had it been treated much earlier (Nord, Andrews, & Carlson, 2002; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; Kaiser Family Foundation, 2017).

Poverty affects health throughout the life course. Among the poor, infant mortality, the risk of death during the first year of life, is twice as high as it is among affluent people (Singh, 2010). Among the very poor in the United States, the death rate among newborns rises to levels we commonly find in low-income countries such as Nigeria and Vietnam. Recent studies point out that Mississippi’s infant mortality is about the same as the low-income African nation of Botswana; the rate in Alabama is higher than in Sri Lanka and many other lower-income nations (Romm, 2014; Ballesteros, 2017).

Income continues to shape health into adulthood. When asked to rate their personal health, 77 percent of adults living in families with incomes over $100,000 replied “excellent” or “very good.” But only 48 percent of people whose families had incomes of less than $35,000 could say the same (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015).

Finally, a basic measure of health is how long, on average, people can expect to live. Research confirms a longevity gap by which well-off people live longer than poor people. Low-income men and women are more likely to die young from infectious diseases, violence, and accidents. By contrast, most rich people die of cancer and heart failure, diseases that typically take their toll in old age. How great is the income-based gap in longevity? For women born in 1920, life expectancy for those in the top 10 percent of the income distribution was five years greater than for those in the bottom 10 percent. Among men of the same age, the wealthy outlived the poor by six years. Moving ahead fifty years to look at people born in 1970, the income gap in life expectancy has more than doubled, with wealthy women projected to live thirteen

48 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

transform low-income children into low- achieving students who grow up to be low-income adults. For the country as a whole, almost 30 percent of economically disadvantaged chil- dren do not graduate from high school. For the fifty largest U.S. cit- ies, where poverty rates are high, public schools graduate just half of all students (U.S. Department of Education, 2015). Under these con- ditions, it is easy to see how poor schooling can help pass poverty from one generation to the next.

Even for those who stay in school, rich and poor children typi- cally have very unequal opportuni- ties. Many schools use some form of tracking, by which the schools divide children into college-bound (aca- demic) and job-oriented (vocational)

coursework. The stated goal of tracking is to teach accord- ing to each child’s academic ability. But research suggests that school officials often see privileged children as more talented and label children as less able just because they are poor. The result is that the most privileged children get the best our public schools have to offer, while many poor children are taught in crowded classrooms with fewer computers, older books, and the weakest teachers (Kozol, 1991; Thornburgh, 2006).

Crime and Punishment Anyone who watches police reality shows on TV is bound to conclude that most criminals are poor people. Assault, rob- bery, burglary, auto theft—these so-called “street crimes” are the offenses that get most of the public’s attention and are featured most in the mass media. When it comes to street crimes, the facts support the conclusion that economically disadvantaged people are involved more often than afflu- ent people as offenders and also as victims. But rich peo- ple, too, commit crimes. However, the public pays far less attention to the crimes that are most likely to be committed by wealthy people, including tax evasion, stock fraud, false advertising, bribery, and environmental pollution. This is so despite the fact that such offenses almost certainly cause greater harm to society as a whole.

Our society’s greater focus on street crime puts the poor at risk of arrest, trial, and prison. Poor people who enter the criminal justice system must also rely on public defenders or court-appointed attorneys, typically lawyers who are underpaid and overworked. Wealthy people in trouble can afford to enlist the help of private lawyers who employ expert witnesses to support their claims in court. Such an

554,000 people are homeless in the United States on any given night, and as many as 1.6 million people are home- less at some point during a year. The Trump administra- tion has said little about this issue even as the number of homeless people in the United States increased during the president’s first year in office. Dozens of mayors across the country claim that they cannot handle the problem without federal assistance (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2017; Walker, 2018).

There are many causes of homelessness, and how much emphasis is given to any particular cause depends on one’s political outlook. Conservatives point to personal problems, noting that more than one-third of homeless peo- ple suffer from a mental disorder or abuse alcohol or some other drug. Liberals counter that homelessness has less to do with personal shortcomings than with poverty, and they point to increasing economic inequality, a rise in low-wage jobs, and a lack of affordable housing as major causes.

A large majority of homeless people report that they do not work; however, about 18 percent say that they do hold at least a part-time job. Average income for homeless individuals is low—just $350 per month; for families, the figure is about $475. Such income is simply not enough to pay for housing (U.S. Conference of Mayors, 2015; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2015).

Limited Schooling Poor children are less likely than rich children to complete high school. Therefore, economically disad- vantaged girls and boys face tough odds of going to col- lege and even smaller odds of completing an advanced degree. Too often, underperforming public schools

Homeless shelters provide necessary housing to hundreds of thousands of people across the United States. But the larger question is why do so many people lack affordable housing in the first place?

To dd

B en

ne tt

/Z U

M A

P re

ss /N

ew sc

om .

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 49

most worthy of support. The categories of people who benefit from social welfare programs change along with the level of resources that government makes available according to the administration in power and the political mood of the country.

2. Social welfare programs benefit most of the U.S. population. Welfare programs include not only assistance to poor families but also price supports for farmers, the oil depletion allowance to petroleum companies, the homeowner’s tax deduction for home mortgage interest, pensions paid to the elderly, bene- fits for veterans, and low-interest loans for students. Government bailouts of giant corporations in re- cent years are all examples of massive social welfare assistance.

3. Overall, social welfare programs reduce economic inequality, but only a little. To fund social welfare programs, government takes from the rich (in taxes) and gives to the poor (in benefits), which has the effect of reducing economic inequality. But many programs, such as corporate bailouts, benefit wealth- ier individuals and families. Even among ordinary people, the tax deduction on home mortgage inter- est, worth about $80 billion annually, goes mostly to affluent people who own larger homes. In 2018, the home mortgage deduction was worth four times more than what the government spent to provide assistance to poor families in need of housing (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016; Woo & Salviati, 2017).

The ongoing welfare debate points out a hard truth: People in this country like to think they are compassion- ate, but our cultural emphasis on personal responsibility makes many people uneasy with giving assistance to the poor. The Social Policy box evaluates six common assump- tions about public assistance.

A Brief History of Welfare Social welfare has a long and controversial history in the United States. The following discussion surveys welfare policies in three historical periods—the colonial era, the early industrial era, and the modern era after the Great Depression—and concludes with a review of the 1996 welfare reforms (Trattner, 1980; Katz, 1990, 1996).

The Colonial Era During the 1600s and 1700s, early immi- grants who came to the United States settled in small com- munities where families struggled to survive in a strange and uncertain world. Because almost everyone was poor, family members and neighbors were quick to lend a help- ing hand to one another.

Even so, some colonists, including the early Puritans in New England, looked down on the very poor, seeing

advantage does not always get people off the hook, but it does lower the chances of being charged with a crime or, if charged, of being convicted. Perhaps this is why not one of the executives of Wall Street’s Lehman Brothers invest- ment bank—the people widely thought to have engaged in the mortgage fraud that led to the collapse of the country’s banking system—has faced prosecution (Holland, 2013).

Finally, for anyone who ends up serving time in jail, finding a good job later on is difficult. Just as poverty raises the risk of getting into trouble with the law, being con- victed of a crime raises the odds that a low-income person will end up staying poor. For this reason, some advocate removing questions about criminal history from job appli- cations (Western, 2002; Holodny, 2017).

Political Alienation Given how hard the poor struggle to get by, you might expect that they would support causes and candidates that would bring about change. Sometimes poor people do organize politically, but the fact is that many do not even vote. In recent presidential elections, roughly 80 percent of people earning $100,000 or more voted; slightly more than half of people earning less than $40,000 did the same. This pattern suggests that many poor people feel alienated from a system that they think does not serve their interests (Pew Research Center, 2015; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). From another angle, in the 2016 presidential election the appeal of non-establishment candidates— including Democrat Bernie Sanders and Republican Donald Trump—suggests that a large share of U.S. adults would vote if they thought their vote would make a difference.

Responding to Poverty: The Welfare System 2.4 Explain the changing ways our society has used the

social welfare system to respond to poverty.

To address the problem of poverty, all high-income coun- tries rely on various kinds of social welfare programs, organized efforts by government, private organizations, or individuals to assist needy people considered worthy of assistance. Social welfare takes many forms, including government benefits for workers who lose their jobs, Red Cross ben- efits for flood victims, or simply people lending a hand to their neighbors after a tornado destroys many homes. The largest welfare programs, which are run by the federal government and state governments, typically have three characteristics:

1. Social welfare programs benefit people or activities defined as worthy. The public and its leaders debate and decide which categories of people or activities are

50 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

Who gets government welfare? Corporations receive more money than poor people. In 2018, Amazon carried out a search for a second headquarters. More than 200 cities submitted bids and twenty cities across North America made the short list. In the end, Amazon decided to build a new headquarters divided between New York City and a Virginia suburb of Washington, DC, in exchange for more than $2 billion in tax forgiveness and other incentives.

SOCIAL POLICY

An Undeserved Handout? The Truth about “Welfare” Are welfare assistance checks and food stamps just handouts for people too lazy to work? What are the facts? Let’s evaluate six widespread assumptions about public assistance.

1. “Most welfare goes to the poor.” Not true. If we look at all government income programs, we find hundreds that offer financial benefits—cash transfers or reduced taxes—to many categories of people at all income levels, including the wealthy. For example, almost all of the government “bailout” money given to banks in 2008 and 2009 ended up benefiting rich people. Corporations were the major beneficiaries of the 2017 tax bill. Overall, no more than half of all government benefits go to poor people.

Furthermore, large corporations are able to pay low wages to workers only because families whose earnings are below the poverty line can receive government as- sistance. Therefore, as some see it, companies such as Walmart and McDonald’s actually benefit the most from welfare (Ritholtz, 2013).

2. “Most income assistance goes to able-bodied people who should be working.” Not true. Most low-income people who benefit from government assistance are either too old or

too young to work. Some programs do assist poor parents who do not work. But these funds are primarily for support of children, and this government assistance is provided only for a limited time.

3. “Once on welfare, always on welfare.” Before the welfare reforms of 1996, there was some truth to this. Back then, half of families who ever enrolled in Aid for Families with Dependent Children received public assistance for four years or more. But because of limits in the current program (including a lifetime benefit limit of five years), this is no longer the case.

4. “Most welfare benefits go to African Americans and other minorities.” Not quite true. Non-Hispanic whites receive 48 percent of all food assistance money. African Americans receive 31 percent, Hispanics receive 15 percent, Native Americans and Asian Americans receive 5 percent, with the remainder of money going to people of unknown race and ethnicity. So adding minority categories together, minorities receive slightly more than half of these benefits, which is about the same as the dollars white people receive (U.S. Department of Agriculture, 2017). A higher share of minority

R oc

ky G

rim es

/S hu

tt er

st oc

k.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 51

the worst slums of a city, where a staff of social scien- tists and reform-minded activists helped new immi- grants get settled in their new surroundings. This social movement also tried to influence public opinion with the goal of making the public more compassionate toward the poor.

The Twentieth Century By 1900, millions of immigrants were streaming into the United States. The expansion of poor neighborhoods in large cities along the East Coast fueled hostility toward the poor. Within a few years, the outbreak of World War I (1914–18) made matters worse by raising suspicion about the “foreigners” in our midst. In this fearful climate, there was little public support for any type of welfare program.

Then, in 1929, the Great Depression rolled across the United States. As many as one-fourth of all working peo- ple lost their jobs, and the economic collapse suddenly sent millions of families into the swelling ranks of the poor. Banks closed, wiping out people’s life savings, and fam- ilies in debt lost their farms and were forced from their homes. Under such conditions, it became impossible to see poverty as caused by people who were lazy or “different.” It was then that U.S. society began to define poverty as a social problem.

Franklin Roosevelt became president in 1933 on the promise of what he called the “New Deal”, government assistance to help millions made poor by the Depression. Throughout the 1930s, the federal government enacted many new programs to fight poverty, the most important of which was Social Security. Today, this program pro- vides monthly income to 58 million people, most of whom are elderly.

Roosevelt’s reforms eased the suffering, and World War II (1939–45) spurred the U.S. economy, ending the Depression and also directing public attention

poverty as a sign of moral weakness. Throughout the col- onies, free people looked down on slaves as personally inferior and therefore morally undeserving. During this period, there was hardly any government at all, and wel- fare amounted to acts of personal kindness between kin and neighbors.

The Early Industrial Era As the Industrial Revolution began in the early 1800s, U.S. cities swelled with immi- grants. The new industrial capitalist economy encour- aged a spirit of individualism and self-reliance. The idea that people were responsible for their own social position remained popular, and as anonymity and social diver- sity increased, attitudes toward the poor became more negative. As a result, the public criticized charity as a misguided policy that would only end up reducing peo- ple’s need to work and encourage them to become lazy. Some organizations such as the Salvation Army (founded in 1865) did offer food and shelter to the poor, but they included moral instruction reinforcing the belief that the poor were weak and of bad character and in need of reforming themselves.

But not everyone shared this harsh view of the poor. In the 1870s, the scientific charity movement (really an early form of sociology) began studying what categories of peo- ple were poor, why people were poor, and what could be done to help them. Researchers soon learned that most poor people were not lazy but were men and women for whom there were no jobs, children without parents, women without husbands, victims of factory accidents, and working people earning too little to support a family. In short, scientific charity claimed that most poverty was not the fault of the poor themselves but the result of how society operates.

This new thinking helped guide the settlement house movement. Settlement houses were buildings located in

people than white people receive food assistance because, as we have already explained, these categories of the population are at higher risk for being poor.

5. “Welfare encourages single women to have children.” Not true. The average number of children among women without husbands is the same whether or not families receive welfare support. The case has also been made that welfare assistance enabled some women to support children without marrying. This may be true, but the trend toward more single parenting is found among people of all income levels and is evident in all high-income nations.

6. “Welfare fraud is a serious national problem.” Not really. Social service agency employees will tell you that a few people do take advantage of the system, but they also

confirm that the vast majority of benefits go to people who are truly needy.

What Do You Think? 1. Did any of the facts presented in this box surprise you?

Which ones? Why?

2. In general, would you expand social welfare programs, keep them the same, or reduce them? Explain your answer.

3. Do you think that the recent economic recession affected how people think about poverty and welfare assistance? Explain your answer.

52 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

presidents prompted U.S. society to face up to the con- tinuing reality of poverty.

A glance back at Figure 2–5 shows that the War on Poverty actually worked. The official poverty rate, which was about 22 percent in 1960, fell to about 11 percent by

to other issues. Later, in the 1960s, researchers redis- covered poverty in both cities and the rural country- side (Harrington, 1962), prompting President Lyndon Johnson in 1964 to launch his War on Poverty. The Defining Moment feature takes a closer look at how two

Franklin Roosevelt, who was president from 1933 until 1945, established Social Security and other programs that provide a social safety net to the U.S. population. A generation later, Lyndon Johnson, who was president from 1963 until 1968, declared a national “War on Poverty” that succeeded in reducing the poverty rate.

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment U.S. Society Discovers Poverty During the first centuries of our country’s history, so many people lived with so little. Most people today could barely imagine such widespread and extreme poverty. Back then, however, most poor people accepted their situation because when they looked around, everyone else was living pretty much the same way.

With the onset of the Industrial Revolution, living standards rose for the majority of the population. Yet the gap between rich and poor became much bigger. Still, the poverty of those left behind—in urban neighborhoods and rural communities— provoked only passing public concern, probably because many of the poor were becoming defined as “different” (they were stereotyped as “immigrants” or “hillbillies”) by those who were better off.

Another change took place with the Great Depression in 1929, when men and women in all social classes lost much of the security they had previously taken for granted. Suddenly, people started to talk about poverty as a serious social problem. Facing up to poverty was encouraged by Franklin D. Roosevelt, elected president in 1932, when he pointed out the problem of “one-third of a nation ill-clothed, ill-housed, and ill-fed.” His

economic programs that came to be known as the New Deal— most importantly, the Works Progress Administration (WPA) employment projects and Social Security—addressed the problem of poverty by providing a social safety net for the U.S. population.

By the end of World War II, the Depression had given way to a period of economic prosperity. But despite the fact that the United States had become a very rich nation, anyone willing to look could find a large underclass of poor people in both urban and rural areas. Lyndon B. Johnson, president from 1963 until 1968, mobilized the country once again declaring that the federal government would wage a “war on poverty.” He pushed the government to “strike at the causes, not the consequences” of poverty, and Congress reacted by passing programs such as Title I federal funding for public schools in low-income districts, Head Start for preschool children, and the Job Corps training program for adults.

Together, Presidents Roosevelt and Johnson did more than any other U.S. leaders to define poverty as a social problem. Just as important, they directed the power of the government toward creating a solution.

H W

ill ia

m T

et lo

w /H

ul to

n A

rc hi

ve /G

et ty

Im ag

es .

C ec

il S

to ug

ht on

/L B

J P

re si

de nt

ia l L

ib ra

ry .

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 53

the early 1970s. But by the 1980s, the mood of the coun- try again turned against social welfare. Beginning with the Reagan administration, the federal government scaled back assistance programs, claiming (like critics a century earlier) that welfare was discouraging personal initiative and creating dependency.

The 1996 Welfare Reform In the early 1990s, about 8 million poor households in the United States were receiving public assistance totaling some $40 billion annually, for an average of about $5,000 per family. The most important assistance program was Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), a pro- gram of the federal government that provided income to poor mothers with children.

Changes in the welfare system began to take shape in 1992, when President Bill Clinton pledged to “end welfare as we know it.” In 1994, the Democratic president and a Republican Congress joined forces to produce the most sweeping welfare reform since the Roosevelt era. The purpose of the reform was suggested by its formal title: the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. First, responsibility for helping the poor shifted from the federal government to the states. The old federal program, AFDC, was ended in favor of a state-level program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). The new rules were intended to increase the per- sonal responsibility of the poor by requiring able-bodied people seeking benefits to find a job or enroll in job train- ing. In addition, the program limits the period of time that families can receive benefits to two consecutive years with a lifetime cap of five years.

Supporters of welfare reform (mainly conservatives) call the policy a success. They point to the fact that the nation’s welfare rolls fell by half. In addition, half of those who have left welfare now have jobs, and most of the remainder are attending school or enrolled in training programs. But critics (mostly liberals) counter that most people who have left welfare for work now have low-wage jobs that leave them struggling to make ends meet. They claim that this reform may have reduced welfare assistance, but it has done little to reduce poverty. A recent study shows that today’s wel- fare program fails to provide any cash assistance to three out of four poor families in the United States (Lichter & Crowley, 2002; Lichter & Jayakody, 2002; Floyd, Pavetti, & Schott, 2017).

Theories of Poverty 2.5 Apply sociological theory to the issue of poverty.

Why does poverty exist in the first place? Some answers can be found by applying sociology’s major theoretical approaches to the issue of poverty.

Structural-Functional Analysis: Some Poverty Is Inevitable There are a number of structural-functional theories. Each has something to say about why poverty exists.

Social Pathology Theories: Personal Deficiency Some early sociologists argued in favor of a “bad apple” theory by claiming that poverty resulted from personal flaws. For example, Herbert Spencer (1820–1903) developed an anal- ysis, called social Darwinism, which viewed society as a competitive arena where the most able became rich and the least able fell into poverty. Spencer described the operation of a competitive society as the “survival of the fittest” in which the “less fit” fell behind.

The social pathology approach is also found in the work of the anthropologist Oscar Lewis (1961, 1966). Lewis studied poor communities in San Juan (Puerto Rico), Mexico City, and New York City, asking why some neighborhoods remained poor from generation to generation. His conclusion: They contain a culture of poverty, cultural patterns that encourage poverty as a way of life. Lewis claimed that people adapt to poverty, accepting their plight and giving up hope that life can

In 1996, Congress reformed the nation’s welfare program, enacting the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. As its name suggests, this policy requires people who seek public assistance to enroll either in school or in a job training program. Do you think that people who need income assistance should have to prepare for work in this way? Why or why not?

Ji m

W es

t/ im

ag eB

R O

K E

R /N

ew sc

om .

54 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

(measured by a lower rate of employment), declining rates of marriage, and declining religious values. These trends combine to weaken the social fabric of these com- munities and to push up poverty rates. Overall, Murray concludes, the United States is more and more breaking apart into two societies—a small “new upper class” and an enlarging “new lower class.”

Social Disorganization Theory: Too Much Change In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago linked poverty to social disorganization, a breakdown in social order caused by rapid social change. Industrial factories drew tens of millions of people— rural Midwesterners, men and women from towns in Appalachia, African Americans from the South’s Cotton Belt, and immigrants from Europe—to the rapidly grow- ing cities of the North and Midwest.

People arrived too fast for a city’s neighborhoods, schools, and factories to absorb them. Cities were chal- lenged by overcrowded apartment buildings, overflowing classrooms, and too many people for the number of avail- able jobs. The overall result was poverty and related social problems. Only with time could we expect local communi- ties to respond to these imbalances to reduce the poverty problem.

In recent years, the high rate of immigration to the United States, especially from Latin America, has con- tributed to high poverty rates in the West (especially the

Southwest), where new arrivals to this country struggle to find housing and work. In time, according to the social dis- organization approach, we would expect most of these families to improve their situation.

Modern Functional Theory: Some Inequality Is Useful Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore (1945) asked, “Why does inequality exist everywhere?” Their answer was that inequality— specifically, differences in the rewards given to people who perform various jobs—is useful for the operation of soci- ety. Davis and Moore explained that some jobs (say, work as a security guard) have relatively less importance and can be performed by just about anyone. But other positions (for example, surgeons and concert pianists) require rare talents and extensive training.

How can society draw talent toward more important work? How can soci- ety motivate people to develop their

improve. Thinking this way, Lewis continued, people may turn to alcohol or drugs, become violent, neglect their families, and end up living just for the moment. Doing so, they pass on the culture of poverty from one generation to the next.

A more recent social pathology theory is the “bell curve” thesis of Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray (1994). Over the course of the twentieth century, they argue, the United States became more of a meritocracy, a system of social inequality in which social standing corre- sponds to personal ability and effort. In today’s information age, intelligence matters more than ever in the world of work, and the marketplace greatly rewards personal abil- ity. Therefore, the argument goes, the ranks of the rich are increasingly filled by people who are both smart and pro- ductive, leaving behind the poor who are more and more likely to be people with limited intelligence. For this rea- son, Herrnstein and Murray conclude, government pro- grams can do only so much to improve the plight of the poor: As Herbert Spencer said a century earlier, they are capable of little more.

More recently, Charles Murray (2013) has studied the diverging cultures of both high- and low-income communities. He studied high- income communities where he found ample evidence of optimism about the future and a strong work ethic. By contrast, in white, working-class communities he discovered widespread pessimism about the future, eroding industriousness

Engineers and architects are among the higher-paid workers in the U.S. labor force. From a structural-functional point of view, our society rewards work that requires rare skills and expensive education. As you read on, try to develop a critical response to this position based on social-conflict theory.

E sb

in -A

nd er

so n/

Th e

Im ag

e w

or ks

.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 55

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining the Problem Symbolic-interaction theory highlights the social construc- tion of problems and solutions. This approach explores how members of a society view the poor and come to understand the causes of poverty.

For instance, the old structural-functional “personal deficiency” approach, which is still widespread in our society today, defines poverty as a reflection of the short- comings of the poor themselves. From this point of view, it is a lack of motivation or intelligence, or some other per- sonal flaw that causes low social standing. Given our soci- ety’s individualistic culture, it’s not surprising that many people today are quick to define the problem of poverty as resulting from traits of poor people themselves. In effect, the poor are seen as responsible for their own condition.

William Ryan (1976) describes how society can define people as responsible for their own poverty. He calls this process blaming the victim, finding the cause of a social problem in the behavior of people who suffer from it. He explains that the process of blaming the victim involves four simple steps:

1. Pick an issue that you see as a social problem. Almost any problem will do; here, our focus is poverty.

2. Decide how people who suffer from the problem differ from everyone else. It is easy to see that many poor people don’t dress as well as others; many also don’t speak English very well. Many have little school- ing. Most poor people live in rundown housing. They sometimes get into trouble with the police. The list goes on and on.

3. Define these differences as the cause of the problem. Blaming the victim rests on claims such as “Of course those people are poor! Just look at them! Listen to them speak! See where they live! Who is surprised that people like that are poor? They deserve to be where they are.”

4. Respond to the problem by trying to change the victims, not the larger society. Think to yourself that people would not be poor if only they would dress better, speak better, live in better neighborhoods—in short, be more like those who are well off.

However, if we were to view the poor as people who are no different from anyone else, the picture would change. Poor people would now be seen as individuals who are struggling—often heroically—against disadvan- tages that they face through no fault of their own. When we view the poor this way, we come to see the society—not any personal failings of poor people themselves—as the main cause of poverty.

abilities and to gain the schooling they need to do import- ant and demanding jobs? Davis and Moore claim the answer is only by giving them greater rewards, such as higher income, greater power, and more prestige. Linking rewards to the importance of various jobs is therefore use- ful. This means that social stratification—any system in which some people receive greater rewards than others— has some positive functions for a society.

Davis and Moore point out that any society could provide equal rewards to people regardless of what job they perform, but doing so would amount to saying that it makes no difference who does what job or how well the job is done. A society with no differences in rewards, they claim, would not be very productive because it would give people little incentive to strive for more important work or even to work hard at their present job. In sum, a sys- tem of unequal rewards—in short, a system of both rich and poor—is a strategy that actually makes society more productive.

Herbert Gans (1971) offers a critical response to Davis and Moore’s theory, pointing out that inequal- ity is useful but only to aff luent people. The function of inequality, Gans claims, is to ensure that there is a sup- ply of poor people willing to do almost any job, no mat- ter how unpleasant. Other than poor people (who have few choices in their lives), he asks, who would want to perform farm labor, pick up garbage, or clean other peo- ple’s homes? In addition, the poor also buy things no one else wants, including rundown housing, old cars, rebuilt appliances, and secondhand clothing. In short, Gans sug- gests, poverty exists because well-off people benefit from others being poor.

EVALUATE

All structural-functional theories share a key argument: At least some poverty is a natural, expected part of life that has some useful conse- quences. Critics, especially people who are more liberal, take issue with these theories, particularly the idea that poor individuals are somehow personally inferior. As they see it, poverty is not something that people bring on themselves, nor is it inevitable. Rather, poverty has economic causes, including unemployment, low wage levels that leave even full-time workers poor, and our nation’s tolerance for striking economic inequality.

Why, then, have such theories been popular? Perhaps because locating the causes of poverty in poor people themselves justifies the status quo and turns attention away from flaws in society itself. In addition, these theories tend to appeal to the rich and powerful, who (according to this analysis) are viewed as personally deserving of what they have.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Identify three types of functional theory and give a brief statement of what each has to say about poverty.

56 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

overthrow capitalism in favor of a more just system that would operate the economy in a way that would distrib- ute wealth more equally (for details about how capital- ism works and how socialism differs from capitalism, see Chapter 11, “Economy and Politics”).

In the century and a quarter since Marx’s death, the United States and other high-income nations have seen living standards rise for all categories of people, a fact that helps explain why the workers’ revolution that Marx predicted has not taken place, at least not yet. Even so, most income and wealth still go to a very small share of the peo- ple. Just as important, economic inequality has been increas- ing in recent decades, and the poor in the United States have actually been losing ground. Following Marx’s think- ing, although U.S. society has managed to avoid a workers’ revolution, the problem of poverty remains very real.

More Than Money: Cultural Capital More recent conflict theories have explained that social inequality involves not only income and wealth but also cultural capital, skills, val- ues, attitudes, and schooling that increase a person’s chances of success. Pierre Bourdieu and Jean-Claude Passeron (1977) argue that young people born into affluent families benefit from a rich cultural environment. From an early age, par- ents read to these children and enroll them in a wide range of sports and other activities. The advantages that affluent children gain, both at home and at school, all but ensure their success.

On the other hand, those born to low-income families have few such advantages and benefit from far less cultural capital. Children who grow up in poor families may receive less personal attention from parents (especially in activities such as reading). Such children may have less opportunity to develop their skills and imagination, they may see less of the world, and they may develop less confidence in their own abilities. As a result, low-income children are impov- erished in more ways than one. As economic inequality has increased, evidence suggests, differences in the cultural capital gained by rich and poor children are also increasing (Miller, 2015).

Multicultural Theory: Poverty, Race, and Ethnicity The social-conflict approach also includes multicul- tural theory, which links poverty to race and ethnicity. To see how race and ethnicity affect income, consider that, in 2016, the median income for non- Hispanic white families was $65,041. For African American fam- ilies, however, median family income was $39,490, or 61 percent as much as white families. The figure for Hispanic families was $47,675, 73 percent of the white income level.

This is why the risk of poverty for both African Americans (22.0 percent are poor) and Hispanics (19.4  percent) is more than twice as high as the risk of

Ryan suggests that instead of shaking our heads at the rundown houses where poor people live, we should ask why U.S. society allows so many people to live in such inadequate housing. To offer another example, instead of pointing out how little schooling poor people have, we might ask why we tolerate an educational system that fails to provide adequate schooling to so many students.

EVALUATE

Symbolic-interaction theory is useful in showing that poverty is not simply an issue of money; it is also a matter of meanings, or how people come to understand the larger world. Whatever the issue we come to define as a problem, we can look for the causes of the situation in the people who suffer or, as William Ryan suggests, in the larger society. But saying that society is to blame only raises additional questions. We also need to know exactly how and why society makes some people poor. Such concerns bring us to the social-conflict approach.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Explain the process of “blaming the victim,” pointing to ways we tend to blame the poor for their own poverty.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Poverty Can Be Eliminated Social-conflict theory takes the view that poverty is in no way inevitable or natural, and it is certainly a problem our society needs to fix. This approach also rejects the idea that poverty results from flaws in poor people themselves. On the contrary, it places the blame for poverty in the opera- tion of society itself.

Marxist Theory: Poverty and Capitalism Karl Marx could see that the Industrial Revolution had greatly increased economic production. He pointed out that, applying industrial technology, society had the ability, for the first time in human history, to bring an end to poverty. But Marx explained that poverty was far from over. In fact, economic inequality was becoming greater. Poverty continued not because of any shortage of mate- rial goods but because the industrial-capitalist economy placed almost all of this enormous wealth in the hands of very few people. In short, the owners of the means of production became ever more rich and powerful. At the same time, the workers in the capitalist economy, with only their labor to sell, were powerless and faced a life of low wages.

Marx pointed to what he called an internal contradiction in the capitalist economy: A system that produced so much ended up making the majority so poor. From this obser- vation, Marx concluded that the only way to end poverty was to replace the industrial-capitalist system. Therefore, he spent his life encouraging workers to join together to

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 57

ethnicity remain, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and people in other minority categories enjoy greater affluence and broader participation in our society than ever before. A century ago, after all, the segregation of African Americans from the larger society was a matter of law, and some categories of people had yet to earn the right to vote. Such blatant examples of inequality, say these critics, have all but disappeared. They simply no longer exist.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Why did Marx claim that poverty was rooted in the capitalist economic system? How is culture as well as money a dimension of poverty? What does multicultural theory tell us about poverty?

Feminist Analysis: Poverty and Patriarchy Feminist theory is an important dimension of the social-conflict approach that focuses on social inequal- ity involving gender. This theory begins with the fact of patriarchy, a social pattern in which males dominate females. In practice, patriarchy means that men typically enjoy more wealth, prestige, and power in our society than women do. In addition, women of all racial and ethnic categories are at higher risk of poverty than men.

The Feminization of Poverty We have already described the trend by which women make up an increasing share of the poor. A key reason for this trend is that the risk of being poor is especially high for single women. The rate of poverty among families with young children headed by a woman (with no man present) is 27 percent, twice the rate of 13 percent among families headed by a man (with no woman present). For married-couple families, the rate is a much lower 5 percent.

poverty among non-Hispanic white people (8.8 percent). Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders have above- average incomes ($81,431 in 2016) but a poverty rate of 10.1 percent, which is somewhat higher than the rate for non-Hispanic white people. Chapter 3 (“Racial and Ethnic Inequality”) presents a full discussion of this issue.

EVALUATE

One of the earliest contributions of social-conflict theory is Karl Marx’s claim that social inequality involves the struggle between owners and workers within a capitalist economy. More recently, social-conflict theorists have extended this analysis, pointing out how society unequally distributes not only money and power but also cultural capital. In addition, multicultural theory focuses on the inequality involving race, ethnicity, and gender.

Marx argued that poverty is a normal part of any society with a capitalist economy. Yet critics of Marxist theory point out that Marx (who lived during the early industrial-capitalist era) did not foresee ways that capitalist societies would eventually improve living stan- dards for working people and greatly reduce the extent of poverty. In fact, living standards for working people today are far higher than they were during Marx’s lifetime.

Critics (speaking from a conservative point of view) also ask, doesn’t being rich or poor at least partly reflect the choices people make or the talents they have as individuals? If we deny that people have any responsibility for their social standing, we all end up being little more than passive victims of society. Critics of the social-conflict approach also claim that there is considerable meritocracy—the ability to rise or fall based on individual talent and effort—in today’s society so that social position does reflect personal talent and effort.

Finally, multicultural theory points out how our society puts racial and ethnic minorities at high risk for poverty. But critics respond that, although social differences based on race and

What makes low-income children different from children born to affluent families? On the face of it, these children lack the material things others take for granted. In addition, however, low-income children have less cultural capital, and many experience less attention from parents and other adults. Researchers have documented how children who lack social interaction with adults develop more slowly, acquire a smaller vocabulary, and gain fewer intellectual skills.

Heiner Heine/imageBROKER/Alamy Stock Photo.

58 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

linked to race and ethnicity: The 2016 median income of non-Hispanic white men working full time was $55,080; African American men typically earned just $38,997, which is 71 percent as much; Hispanic men earned $33,086, or 60 percent as much.

Now add in gender. Compared with African American men, African American women (again, compar- ing just full-time workers) earned $34,953, or 89.6 percent as much. Hispanic women earned an average of $29,924, or 90.4 percent as much as Hispanic men. These dispari- ties are linked to gender.

Now combine the two dimensions. Compared with non-Hispanic white men, African American women earned just 63.4 percent as much; Hispanic women earned only 54.3 percent as much. By comparing all these numbers, we see that race or ethnicity and gender not only operate alone but also combine so that certain categories of people are doubly disadvantaged (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

EVALUATE

Feminist theory is one type of social-conflict analysis that has gained enormous importance in recent decades. Just as Marxist theory high- lights inequality based on class position and multicultural theory shows inequality based on race and ethnicity, so feminist theory focuses on inequality based on gender. In addition, intersection theory combines these dimensions of inequality, explaining how some categories of people face multiple disadvantages based on a combination of class, race, ethnicity, and gender.

Critics of feminist theory point out that these approaches say little about how opportunities for women and minorities have improved in the past hundred years. A century ago, for example,

Looking at this issue from another angle, while just 10 percent of all poor families with children are headed by a single man, 38 percent are headed by a married couple, and 52 percent are headed by a single woman (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

The link between gender and poverty is actually stron- ger than it was several generations ago. In 1960, just one in four poor families was headed by a woman; in 2016, half were. What explains this trend, which sociologists call the feminization of poverty? One reason is that more of today’s women are raising children by themselves, and single mothers have a tough time earning the money they need to support themselves and their children. But, as feminists see it, the underlying factor that links gender and pov- erty is that, even as more and more women have entered the labor force, U.S. society still provides more income, wealth, power, and prestige to men than to women. Our culture defines most high-paying jobs (such as doctors, air- line pilots, and college presidents) as “men’s work,” while expecting that lower-paying positions (such as nurses, flight attendants, and clerical workers) will be filled by women.

Intersection Theory: Multiple Disadvantages If women are disadvantaged and African Americans and Hispanics are also disadvantaged, are African American or Hispanic women doubly disadvantaged? This question is the focus of intersection theory, the investigation of the interplay of race, class, and gender, often resulting in multiple dimensions of disadvantage.

To see the intersection of various dimensions of inequality in action, let’s start by noting the inequalities

The basic insight of intersection theory is that various dimensions of social stratification—including race and gender—can add up to great disadvan- tages for some categories of people. Just as African Americans earn less than whites, women earn less than men. Thus, African American women face a “double disadvantage,” earning just 63 cents for every dollar earned by non-Hispanic white men. How would you explain the fact that some categories of people are much more likely to end up in low-paying jobs like this one?

Audrey Popov/Shutterstock.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 59

few women in the United States worked for income and none even had the right to vote. Although gender inequality still exists, crit- ics continue, some differences between the sexes reflect different choices people make, particularly about family obligations. Even so, the gap between the social standing of women and men has been steadily narrowing. The gender gap in pay is also getting smaller. Back in 1980, among people from twenty-five to thirty-four, women earned 67 percent as much as men. By 2016, women in this age range were earning 87 percent as much as comparable men (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What does feminist theory tell us about social inequality? What additional insights do we gain from intersection theory?

The Applying Theory table summarizes what each theoretical approach teaches us about poverty.

POLITICS AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 2.6 Analyze economic inequality from various posi-

tions on the political spectrum.

What are we to make of the fact that economic inequality in the United States is increasing? What about the fact that, in

APPLYING THEORY

Poverty

Structural-Functional Theory

Symbolic-Interaction Theory

Social-Conflict Theory Feminist Theory

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level Macro-level

What is the view of poverty?

Early social pathology the- ory and the later culture of poverty theory see personal flaws and the culture of poor communities as the causes of poverty.

Social disorganization theory links poverty and other social problems to rapid social change.

The Davis and Moore theory explains that a system of unequal rewards draws talent to important work and encourages effort, in the process creating social stratification.

Gans points out that inequal- ity is useful primarily to richer people.

Symbolic-interaction theory highlights the meanings peo- ple attach to the poor.

Ryan describes a common view of the poor as “blaming the victim,” which is finding the causes of poverty in the attitudes or behavior of the poor themselves.

Viewing the poor as no different from anyone else encourages the view that society, rather than the poor themselves, is responsible for poverty.

Marx claimed that poverty results from the operation of the capitalist economic system.

Poverty is a matter of not only a lack of material resources but a low level of cultural capital as well.

Multicultural theory points to the high poverty rates of disadvantaged categories of people including African Americans and Latinos and Latinas.

Feminist theory examines the link between social standing and gender. Feminists view the high rate of poverty among women as one consequence of patriarchy.

Intersection theory links vari- ous dimensions of inequality, explaining how they result in a pattern of multiple disadvantages.

the richest nations on Earth, 46.7 million people are poor? Like every other issue we deal with in a social problems course, poverty and wealth are controversial. Some peo- ple consider income inequality as inevitable and link eco- nomic inequality to a free and productive society. Others are highly critical of income inequality and define pov- erty as a pressing national problem that can and must be reduced. Let us now examine how conservatives, liberals, and left-radicals construct the poverty problem and how they define solutions.

Conservatives: Personal Responsibility Conservatives (more to the right on the political spec- trum) celebrate our way of life because it generates remarkable prosperity. As they see it, almost all the pov- erty in the United States is relative poverty. That is, only a small percentage of the people that the government defines as poor live anywhere close to absolute poverty, where day-to-day survival is at stake. According to one recent study, even the poorest 5 percent of U.S. families have more income than 60 percent of the world’s people (Milanovic, 2011).

In the United States, being poor means having less than what government officials claim people living in our rich society ought to have. Conservatives point out that about one-third of families officially counted among the poor own their homes, almost two-thirds have at least one car, and almost all enjoy the use of a television set and a

60 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

needs, as Republican leaders have said over and over, is a vibrant and expanding economy that gives everyone the opportunity to do better (Murray, 1984, 2013; Connerly, 2000; Bork, 2008; Porter, 2016).

Liberals: Societal Responsibility Conservatives point to personal responsibility and a market economy as the solutions to the problem of poverty. But liberals think that helping the poor is a job for everybody. From a liberal point of view, the causes of poverty lie in society rather than in the traits of poor indi- viduals. Most people become poor not because they are lazy or because they make bad choices but because of the way society operates. Most unemployment is caused by economic recession, corporate mergers, downsizing, or outsourcing of work overseas that reduces the number of available jobs. In addition, increasing economic inequal- ity has swelled the ranks of the poor.

The ways in which society causes poverty are also evi- dent in the specific categories of people who are at high risk of being poor. For example, because women are given fewer opportunities than men to work for income and because our society pays working women less than work- ing men, women are at higher risk of being poor.

Liberals also take issue with the idea that even the poor in the United States are well off by global stan- dards. One recent study claims that the well-being of U.S. people in poverty, as measured by life expectancy, infant mortality, risk of homicide, and risk of incarcera- tion, is about the same as in low-income nations (Shaefer, Wu, & Edin, 2016).

Because liberals define poverty as a serious, socie- tal problem, they look for societal solutions. They reject the conservative arguments that individuals must take responsibility for their own social position. According to the liberal viewpoint, the U.S. economy is highly productive, but it distributes income very unequally. Progressive taxation is central to the liberal solution to poverty and economic inequality. Liberals support taxing investment (unearned) income at the same rate as earned income. Many liberals also seek to expand the policy of “income transparency,” which requires corporations and other organizations to publish the income earned by all employees—especially top executives (Gray, 2015). In addition, liberals point out that many people are disad- vantaged by racism and other forms of discrimination that limit their access to good education and high- paying work. Part of their solution to poverty, then, is active enforcement of laws banning discrimination in education and the workplace.

Liberals support government assistance programs that offer some measure of financial security to everyone by

smart phone (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). The big picture, as conservatives see it, is that this country has enjoyed a dramatic increase in living standards over the past cen- tury. In this sense, our society has worked pretty well.

Conservatives hold the traditional value of self- reliance, and therefore they support the idea that people should take responsibility for their personal well-being. They claim that U.S. society still offers opportunity and rewards both individual talent and personal effort. It is true that a few people in our society inherit great wealth; conservatives claim that families have a right and perhaps even a duty to pass along their property to their children. But most successful people—and even most rich people— are men and women who have spent many years in school and who continue to work long and hard at their jobs (Stanley & Danko, 1996).

Speaking for conservatives, the retired general and former U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell recalls that as a young boy, he began his working life pushing a broom. He explains that he always worked hard, doing his best and learning whatever he could from the job he had. As soon as he mastered one task, he asked for another one. He credits discipline and determination—learned from his parents— as the key to his success, helping him to rise to a top posi- tion in the U.S. military and become one of this country’s political leaders. In short, Powell argues, the most effective way to prevent poverty may well be to teach children to value personal responsibility and hard work (Powell & Persico, 1995).

Conservatives claim that taking personal respon- sibility for your life is one key to individual success. In addition, they support a market system that rewards indi- vidual effort not only because it provides a rich material life but also because it gives us extensive personal freedom. Is there a role for government in all this—especially in the fight against poverty? Because conservatives believe people should be responsible for their own social stand- ing and because they support a market system, they want to limit the size of government. Those on the far right favor having the smallest government consistent with maintaining national security. Still many more moderate “compassionate conservatives” support welfare programs that provide assistance to people who are poor through no fault of their own—those with disabilities, the elderly, and children. Most also think that the government should provide a helping hand to veterans who have sacrificed for their country and offer short-term help to anyone thrown out of work. Conservatives supported the 1996 welfare reform in the belief that government assistance should be targeted and limited so that it never replaces personal responsibility. On the contrary, conservatives claim, expanding government welfare programs can make poverty worse by fostering dependency. What this country

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 61

The Radical Left: Change the System Radicals on the left agree with liberals that poverty is a societal issue. Left-radicals also agree with liberals that we cannot expect poor people to improve their situation on their own. But, from a far-left perspective, more than reform is needed because the problem of poverty is built into the operation of a capitalist society (Liazos, 1982). In other words, vast differences between the rich and the poor result from the normal operation of a capitalist economic system. Left-radicals point to the increasing economic inequality in the United States—a trend that continues despite the welfare programs supported by liberals—and conclude that government assistance amounts to little more than a bandage applied to the body of a person with a terminal disease. In short, from the radical-left perspec- tive, the problem goes far beyond poverty to its roots in the capitalist economy.

Karl Marx identified widespread poverty as one of the “internal contradictions” of capitalism. By the term “contradiction,” Marx meant that industrial capitalism produces great wealth but places production under the control of an elite whose members gain most of the eco- nomic benefits. Working families, by contrast, get little for their efforts and, over time, are forced to get by with less and less. For this reason, a very rich society such as the United States can contain millions of people who are des- perately poor.

The radical left claims that the way to solve the prob- lem of poverty is to replace capitalism with a more humane economic system that will greatly reduce economic inequality. The goal of such a system would not be to feed

providing a social safety net. Dismissing conservative wor- ries about creating dependency, liberals view assistance programs as necessary; after all, they point out, millions of people—especially children—are poor through no fault of their own. Liberals also support higher taxes, especially on the rich, to pay for such programs and also to reduce economic inequality.

Liberals would direct tax revenue to social welfare programs that would lift millions of poor families above the poverty line. Public assistance benefits are quite small—in 2013, one study found, the typical “welfare family” received only $378 per month. Such assistance is necessary to survive, liberals argue, but it does not offer people enough to improve their lives. On the other hand, more generous assistance might enable a poor working mother to commute to a better job in a nearby suburb, to purchase better medical care so that she loses fewer days each year to illness, or to finish a high school diploma by taking night courses. Many liberals also support estab- lishing a guaranteed minimum income level for everyone in the country—a plan that is currently being debated in Canada and in several European nations. The idea is that no one, including the sick, should experience life-twisting poverty. Some feminists support this policy as a means to recognize the value of housework historically performed by women without pay (Shulevitz, 2016).

Finally, liberals point out that millions of poor people never even apply for welfare benefits. Why not? In a cul- ture that stresses personal responsibility, asking for help is regarded as an admission of personal failure and a source of shame (Mouw, 2000; Murray, 2000; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2015).

Conservatives claim that we should all take personal responsibility for our social standing; reducing pov- erty, then, depends on the choices and actions of the poor themselves. Liberals claim that poverty is mostly a matter of how society operates; according to this view, government should act to reduce poverty. Radicals on the left claim that ending poverty depends on replacing capitalism. Which view is closest to your own? Why?

Alison Wright/National Geographic Image Collection/Alamy Stock Photo.

62 Chapter 2 Economic Inequality

LEFT TO RIGHT

The Politics of Economic Inequality

Radical-Left View Liberal View Conservative View

What is the problem? The capitalist economic system con- centrates most of the country’s wealth in the hands of a small share of the population.

Millions of men, women, and children have too little income and need assistance.

Many poor people are worthy and should be helped, but social welfare programs can discourage people’s desire to work and may foster dependency.

What is the solution? The capitalist economic system must undergo fundamental changes toward greater governmental control of the economy.

Use higher taxes to expand government assistance programs and raise the income of the poor.

Provide short-term help to those who really need it; strengthen families and promote personal responsibility.

JOIN THE DEBATE 1. Assess the 1996 welfare reform from the radical-left, liberal, and

conservative points of view. From each political position, has the reform been helpful or harmful? To whom? Why?

2. In recent years, Congress has become highly divided and extremely partisan. As the confirmation process for Brett Kavanaugh

demonstrated, Democrats and Republicans seem unable to agree on much of anything. Can you sketch out a national response to poverty that the two sides might be able to support?

3. Which of the three political analyses of economic inequality included here do you find the most convincing? Why?

the greed of the few but to meet the needs of the many. In this way, radicals on the left reach the conclusion that noth- ing less than a basic reformulation of the U.S. economy will result in a solution to the problems of economic inequality and poverty.

The Left to Right table sums up the views of all three political approaches. To understand each of the political positions, it is necessary to look closely at them all.

Going On from Here This chapter describes the extent of economic inequality in the United States and points to many of the consequences. Certain categories of the population—men and white people—are privileged by the way in which our society distributes income and wealth. By contrast, women, chil- dren, and people of color are at high risk of being poor. People who are economically disadvantaged contend with poor health, substandard housing, too little schooling, too few jobs, and a higher rate of crime and violence.

What can we expect in the future? Keep in mind that some trends are positive. Between 1960 and 2016, the official poverty rate fell by almost half, from 22.4 percent to 12.7 percent of the U.S. population. Among the elderly population, the poverty rate dropped by more than two- thirds, from 33.0 percent to 9.3 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Looking back at Figure 2–5, we see that most of the decrease in poverty in the United States occurred between 1960 and the early 1970s. Since then, the overall trend has been slightly upward. Even more troubling, the age cate- gory at greatest risk of poverty is now children: Overall, 18 percent of U.S. children are poor, with much higher rates among African American (31 percent) and Hispanic American (27 percent) youngsters. Perhaps the most press- ing question for the future is what to do about the “new poverty” in the United States involving households com- posed of women and children. The dramatic decline in the poverty rate among the elderly shows that this nation can reduce poverty when the public supports doing so. The

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 63

question is whether we will do as much for our children as we have done for seniors.

Wealth and poverty in the United States have always been controversial, and increasing economic inequality only makes the debate more important. Conservatives respond to the problem of poverty by calling for a strong market economy and focusing on the need for personal responsibility and strong families. They point out that not having a job or having children without being married dramatically raises the odds of being poor for both adults and their children. Liberals call for raising the minimum

wage, expanding child care and job- training programs, expanding the amount of low-income housing, and com- bating workplace discrimination that harms women and people of color. Liberals also support higher taxation, especially on the rich, as a strategy to fund greater benefits for the poor and to reduce economic inequality. Radical- left voices claim that as long as we have a capitalist eco- nomic system, our society will always favor the few and leave more and more people behind. By understanding all these political viewpoints, you can better develop your own position and play a part in this continuing debate.

64

Is economic inequality a problem?

And whose problem is it? This chapter has explained that the way in which people under- stand economic inequality depends on their political attitudes. What people say we ought to do about the extremes of poverty and wealth also depends on politics. Look at the accompanying photos to see two different ways to respond to this issue.

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 2 Economic Inequality

Is being rich a solution or a problem? If you were more liberal, what type of tax system would you support? What if you were more conservative?

To m

as A

ba d/

A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 65

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 1. We hear many people refer to the United States as a

“middle-class society.” Based on what you now know about economic inequality in this country, to what extent is this description accurate? Offer specific ev- idence to support your position.

2. Find out more about the extent of poverty in your local area. U.S. Census Bureau reports are available from the local library, and you can find census data on the internet at https://www.census.gov/data-tools/ demo/saipe/saipe.html?s_appName=saipe&map_ yearSelector=2016 or by downloading the Census Bureau app called dwellr.

3. Have you ever had a low-wage job? If not, this is one good way to begin to understand what it means

to be working but poor. Many low-wage jobs are available on or around campus. Whether you ac- tually take such a job or not, work out a monthly household budget for a family of three, and see how far a minimum-wage job (the federal minimum wage was $7.25 in early 2019) takes you toward sup- porting a family.

4. Where on the political spectrum would you place the various candidates in the 2016 presidential election? Include at least Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders on the Democratic side and Donald Trump on the Repub- lican side. How do these leaders differ in their under- standing of economic inequality?

Hint: Liberals tend to see social structure (including class, gender, and race) as giving

privileges to some people and putting others at a disadvantage. From this point of view,

a homeless person needs assistance. A gift of money would be an act of kindness, but

because the problem of inequality is based on the way society is organized, the real solution

requires changes to society itself. Conservatives tend to see people as responsible for their

own situations. Again, a gift of money might be kind, but as long as people are able-bodied

and healthy, they should take care of themselves (and a handout only encourages more

panhandling). As for the issue of taxation, conservatives typically see wealth as a product of

personal talent and a lot of hard work; people are entitled to what they can earn. Liberals,

on the other hand, see wealth and poverty as twin products of a free market that should be

regulated by government, which should tax the rich (progressive taxation) to provide more for

the poor (in government benefits).

How would you react to confronting this person on a New York City street? If your politics were more liberal, what would you say is the problem here? What would you think should be done about it? What if you were more conservative?

Ian Allenden/123RF.

66

Making the Grade CHAPTER 2 Economic Inequality

Economic Inequality in the United States

2.1 Describe the distribution of income and wealth in the United States.

Income is distributed unequally in the United States, with the richest 20% of families earning 49.2% of all income, ten times as much as the lowest-paid 20% of families.

Wealth is even more unequally distributed, with the rich- est 20% of families controlling 89% of all privately owned wealth, while the poorest 20% of families are actually in debt.

The recent trend has been increasing economic inequality. The top 20% of families have made strong gains, while the bottom 20% have stayed at about the same position.

• The underclass represents a small share of the poor, cut off from the larger society, living in rural areas or inner cities where poverty is widespread.

social stratification (p. 35) society’s system of ranking categories of people in a hierarchy social classes (p. 35) categories of people who have similar access to resources and opportunities income (p. 35) salary or wages from a job plus earnings from investments and other sources wealth (p. 36) the value of all the economic assets owned by a person or family minus any debts progressive taxation (p. 39) a policy that raises tax rates as income increases

The Rich and the Poor: A Social Profile

2.2 Assess differences in the lives of the rich and the poor in the United States.

• Rich families have incomes that average about $225,000 (with some ten times this much or more). Older people, white people, and men are overly repre- sented among the rich.

• The government defines “poverty” as families living with income below a poverty line roughly equal to three times the cost of food. The 2016 poverty line was $24,563 for a nonfarm family of four.

• In 2016, almost half of those in poverty reported in- come below half of the poverty threshold, a difference called the poverty gap.

• At the greatest risk of poverty are children, women who head households, and racial and ethnic minorities.

• The child poverty rate in the United States is high and now stands at 18%.

• Sociologists call the trend of women making up a ris- ing share of the poor (now 56%) the feminization of poverty.

poverty line (p. 41) an income level set by the U.S. government for the purpose of counting the poor poverty gap (p. 42) the difference between the actual income of the typical poor household and the official poverty line feminization of poverty (p. 43) the trend of women making up an increasing share of the poor underclass (p. 46) poor people who live in areas with high concentrations of poverty and limited opportunities for schooling or work

Problems Linked to Poverty

2.3 Analyze how poverty is linked to other social problems.

Poverty affects every aspect of life. The poor

• endure more illness • receive less schooling • experience more unemployment and crime • are more likely to live in inadequate housing or to be

homeless • are less likely to vote

homelessness (p. 47) the plight of poor people who lack shelter and live primarily on the streets

Responding to Poverty: The Welfare System

2.4 Explain the changing ways our society has used the social welfare system to respond to poverty.

Public attitudes toward the poor and support for social welfare programs have varied over the course of this nation’s history.

• The settlement house movement in the late 1800s offered a helping hand to poor immigrants and tried to make the public more compassionate toward the poor.

• President Franklin Roosevelt’s New Deal in the 1930s was the first of many government poverty programs, the most important of which was Social Security.

• In 1964, President Lyndon Johnson declared the War on Poverty to address the growing underclass of poor people in the United States.

Chapter 2 Economic Inequality 67

Theories of Poverty

2.5 Apply sociological theory to the issue of poverty.

Structural-Functional Analysis: Some Poverty Is Inevitable Social pathology theories (including Spencer’s social Darwinism, Lewis’s culture of poverty thesis, and Herrnstein and Murray’s bell curve thesis) view poverty mostly as the result of shortcomings on the part of the poor themselves.

Social disorganization theory views poverty as the result of rapid social change, which makes society unable to meet the needs of all its members.

• More recent functionalism includes the Davis and Moore thesis, which argues that society uses unequal rewards to attract talent to the most important jobs.

• Herbert Gans states that the poor serve the needs of the nonpoor in various ways, including doing work that no one else wants to do.

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining the Problem Symbolic-interaction theory highlights our socially con- structed understandings of poverty. One common view is blaming the victim, which claims that poverty results from traits of the poor themselves.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Poverty Can Be Eliminated Karl Marx claimed that poverty follows from the operation of a capitalist economy. He believed the increasing mis- ery of the working class would eventually lead people to overthrow the capitalist system.

More recent conflict theory explains that inequality involves not just money but also cultural capital—advantages in skills, attitudes, and schooling—that are not available to people born into poverty.

Multicultural theory highlights how African Americans and people in other disadvantaged racial and ethnic cate- gories are at higher risk of poverty.

Feminist Analysis: Poverty and Patriarchy Feminist theory links the higher poverty rate among women to the fact that men dominate women in our society.

• In 1996, welfare reform pushed people off welfare rolls and toward work and schooling. This reform de- creased the number of people receiving benefits but did little to lower the poverty rate.

POLITICS AND ECONOMIC INEQUALITY

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions

2.6 Analyze economic inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

Conservatives: Personal Responsibility • Conservatives believe that social standing is a matter of

personal responsibility; people can escape poverty by taking advantage of the opportunities U.S. society offers.

• Conservatives claim that government social welfare programs often make the poverty problem worse by fostering dependency.

Liberals: Societal Responsibility • Liberals believe that poverty is a societal problem,

stemming mostly from a lack of good jobs.

• Liberals consider poverty a societal responsibility; they support government social programs that benefit the needy.

The Radical Left: Change the System • Radicals on the left claim that poverty results from the

normal operation of the capitalist economy, which ben- efits the capitalist elite.

• Radicals on the left argue that solving the poverty problem requires fundamental change to the economy so that production meets social needs rather than in- creasing private profits.

social welfare programs (p. 49) organized efforts by government, private organizations, or individuals to assist needy people con- sidered worthy of assistance

culture of poverty (p. 53) cultural patterns that encourage pover- ty as a way of life meritocracy (p. 54) a system of social inequality in which social standing corresponds to personal ability and effort social disorganization (p. 54) a breakdown in social order caused by rapid social change blaming the victim (p. 55) finding the cause of a social problem in the behavior of people who suffer from it cultural capital (p. 56) skills, values, attitudes, and schooling that increase a person’s chances of success patriarchy (p. 57) a social pattern in which males dominate females intersection theory (p. 58) the investigation of the interplay of race, class, and gender, often resulting in multiple dimensions of disadvantage

Intersection theory highlights the fact that inequality based on the combined factors of race, class, and gender results in greater disadvantage for some categories of people.

68

3.5 Distinguish discrimination from prejudice and show how the two concepts operate together.

3.6 Apply sociological theory to patterns of racial and ethnic inequality.

3.7 Analyze racial and ethnic inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

3.1 Explain how race and ethnicity are socially constructed.

3.2 Describe four major societal patterns of interaction between majority and minority populations.

3.3 Analyze the social standing of major racial and ethnic categories of the U.S. population.

3.4 Discuss the causes and consequences of prejudice.

Chapter 3

Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Learning Objectives

Constructing the Problem

M ar

k D

un ca

n/ A

P Im

ag es

.

Fu se

/C or

bi s/

G et

ty Im

ag es

.

S tu

ar t F

ra nk

lin /M

ag nu

m P

ho to

s.

Is race simply a matter of skin color?

Race involves socially constructed categories that often give people advantages over others.

Is a “minority” just some category of people with small numbers?

Being a minority is mainly about power. Societies construct minorities by giving more power and privileges to some categories of people than to others.

Is prejudice simply about what people think?

Prejudice and discrimination do involve individual attitudes, but both are also built into the operation of society.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 69

Tracking the Trends

Do race and ethnicity affect our life chances? We like to think that everyone in the United States has equal opportunity to succeed. But when it comes to the jobs people end up doing, the playing field is far from level. Take the sort of work that most of us would consider a good job, such as being a financial analyst. As the figure shows, the odds of a white person becoming a financial analyst are about double the odds of a Hispanic American or African American becoming a financial analyst.

The pattern is reversed when it comes to jobs people view as less desirable. The typical African American has almost double the odds of a white person of ending up with a low-wage job as a janitor, maid, or house cleaner. A Hispanic American person has more than double the odds of ending up doing this type of work as a white person. Do you think that race and ethnicity still matter in U.S. society?

White African American

Hispanic American

White African American

Hispanic American

Relative Odds of Being a Custodian or Housekeeper,

2016

Relative Odds of Being a Financial Analyst,

2016

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor (2018).

70 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Chapter Overview What are race and ethnicity? How are they related to social inequality, shaping people’s access to jobs and income? This chapter explores the social standing of various racial and ethnic categories of the U.S. population. The chapter also explores the history of social diversity in the United States, interpreting this country’s history using the concepts of genocide, segregation, assimilation, and pluralism. You will carry out theoretical analysis of racial and ethnic inequality and learn how people’s political attitudes lead them to construct certain “problems” and favor certain “solutions.”

people have reason to hold some opinion. Surveys show that about 40 percent of U.S. adults favor building a “border wall,” and 60 percent oppose the idea. About 40 percent of survey respondents oppose granting legal status to immi- grants who came to the United States illegally as children; about 60 percent favor legalizing these young people (Suls, 2017; Tyson, 2018).

Most people know that the United States is a nation of immigrants. This is true: The United States has a larger number of foreign-born people residing here than any other country. But most people do not have a good grasp of the relative size of the immigrant population. For example, when a recent survey asked what share of the U.S. population was born in another country, the typical person responded with a figure almost twice the actual share, which is 13 percent. Clearly, most people exaggerate the size of the immigrant population. They also overesti- mate the share of immigrants that are in the United States illegally. The actual share of all U.S. immigrants who do not have legal documentation is about one in four (Pew Research Center, 2015; Zong & Batalova, 2017).

Most immigrants come to the United States to work. Surveys show that half of U.S. adults worry about immi- grants taking jobs from those already here (Pew Research Center, 2015). But the jobs they take are not likely to dis- place others in the labor force. In most cases, immigrants take jobs that people already living here do not want— because the work is hard and the pay is low. At the same time, some people who have better-paying jobs—such as work as an engineer—are also immigrants. Typically, this is because not nearly enough native-born people have the training to fill these necessary jobs.

The United States is and has always been a nation of im- migrants. Everyone who lives in the United States has an- cestors who came here from some other part of the world. But, as this opening story suggests, racial and ethnic differ- ences are not only a source of strength for the United States, they are also a source of tension and conflict. Race and eth- nicity are also important dimensions of social inequality.

“I’m sorry if this is not what you believe or what you want to hear,” Samantha explained to her cousin as they worked their way through a pepperoni pizza, “but I don’t think this country can have an ‘open door’ when it comes to immigration.”

“What are you afraid of?” Justin spoke quietly in response.

“I’m not afraid of anything,” Samantha responded, now on the defensive. “But I don’t like people coming here illegally. They are breaking the law. Many immigrants get on welfare. They take places in our classrooms. They take jobs from Americans. We have enough to do taking care of our own people. We don’t need to save the world.”

Immigration is one of the most hotly debated issues in the United States today, and it has become a political flash point during the Trump presidency. With more than 1 million immigrants entering this country each year, most

N or

m a

Je an

G ar

ga sz

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 71

Middle East. On the other hand, historically isolated people have many physical traits in common. For example, almost all people who live on the island of Japan have black hair.

When Was Race Invented? Centuries ago, as global trade brought the world’s people into greater contact, awareness of human diversity increased. By the late 1500s, Europeans began using the term “race” to catego- rize people. By about 1800, European scientists settled on three broad classifications for humanity. They coined the terms Caucasian (meaning European and Western Asian) to designate people with light skin and fine hair; Negroid (derived from Latin meaning “black”) to refer to people with dark skin and the coarse, curly hair typical of peo- ple living in sub-Saharan Africa; and Mongoloid (referring to the Mongolian region of Asia) to refer to people with yellow or brown skin and distinctive folds on the eyelids.

Are Races Real? Sociologists are quick to point out that, at best, racial categories are misleading and, at worst, they are a harmful way to divide humanity. First, there are no biologically pure races and the traits we think of as “racial” represent only a tiny part of our complex biology. In fact, two individuals randomly selected from within one racial pop- ulation are about as genetically different as two individuals randomly selected from two different racial populations (Witherspoon et al., 2007). Second, because human beings have migrated and reproduced throughout the world, ours is a planet with remarkable physical diversity. For exam- ple, Caucasian people can have very light skin (common in Scandinavia) or very dark skin (common in southern India). Similarly, Negroid people can be dark-skinned (common in Africa) or light-skinned (the Australian Aborigines).

Race and ethnicity are the foundation for many issues that people come to define as social problems. To under- stand why this is the case, first we must answer some basic questions: What are “race” and “ethnicity”? How do they affect our everyday lives? How do they figure into prob- lems of social inequality? This chapter will also explore a range of related issues, including prejudice and discrimi- nation, social processes such as assimilation and segrega- tion, and policies including affirmative action. We start with a look at the central concepts of race and ethnicity.

Race and Ethnicity 3.1 Explain how race and ethnicity are socially

constructed.

In the United States and other countries, race and ethnic- ity are important aspects of social identity, just as they are major dimensions of social inequality. Yet many people are not quite sure what race and ethnicity are all about. Our first step is to clarify the meanings of the concepts.

Race Race is a socially constructed category of people who share biologically transmitted traits that members of a society define as important. For hundreds of years, people in most societies have divided humanity into categories based on skin color, hair texture, facial features, and body shape.

Racial characteristics do not make anyone more or less human. All people everywhere belong to a single biological species, Homo sapiens (Latin words meaning “thinking per- son”), that first emerged in Africa some 250,000 years ago. As Homo sapiens lost their body hair, our human ancestors developed darker skin from a natural pigment called “melanin.” Over thousands of generations since then, physical differences developed among people living in different regions of the world. People who remained in Africa retained darker skin. Among those people who migrated away from Africa toward cooler regions of the world (such as northern Europe), skin color gradually became lighter. In some cases, people with lighter skin migrated back to hotter regions of the planet (such as India) and their descendants gradu- ally developed darker skin (Johnson, 2014).

Migration continues today, of course. As people continue to move around the world, all the physical traits carried by human genes are spread ever more widely. This genetic diversity is especially pronounced among people living in the world’s “crossroads” regions, such as the

The fact that race is a socially constructed category means that members of a society may use any distinctive physical trait to assign people (including themselves) to a racial category. In the early decades of the twentieth century, public opinion in the United States turned against European immigrants as their numbers grew. For a time, many southern Europeans—such as Italians—were “racialized” and defined as nonwhite.

Fo to

te ca

G ila

rd i/S

to ck

by te

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

72 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

simply do not describe human diversity very well (Boza, 2002; Harris & Sim, 2002).

Should Races Exist at All? If racial categories are mislead- ing or even harmful, why do they exist? Some sociologists argue that dividing humanity into racial categories is simply a strategy to allow some people to dominate others (Bonilla- Silva, 1999; Johnson, Rush, & Feagin, 2000; Zuberi, 2001). That is, Europeans attached cultural traits to skin color in order to set apart the “honest and rational” European from the “beastlike” African and the “devious” Asian. Race, in short, is a social device that lets people define themselves as better than those they want to control. By defining peo- ple around the world as being of a different racial category, European colonists justified oppressing them. In North America, European colonists defined native peoples in less than human terms—as “red savages”—to justify killing them and taking their land. Even among Europeans, when people of English ancestry needed Irish and Italian immi- grants to work for low pay, they defined them as racially different (Ignatiev, 1995; Camara, 2000; Brodkin, 2007).

Well into the twentieth century, laws in many south- ern states defined “colored” as anyone having as little as one-thirty-second African ancestry (that is, one African American great-great-great-grandparent). By 1970, such “one drop of blood” laws were overturned by the courts, allowing parents to declare the race of their child as they wish (usually stated on the birth certificate). Even today, however, most people still consider racial identity important.

Multiracial People An important trend is the increasing number of people in this country who identify themselves as “multiracial.” In a recent government survey, 9.7 million people in the United States described themselves as multi- racial, identifying with more than one racial category (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Marriage between people of different racial categories is becoming more common and now accounts for 10 per- cent of all marriages in the United States. One predictable result is that the official number of multiracial births has tripled over the past twenty years and represents about 14 percent of all births (Bialik, 2017). As time goes on, mem- bers of our society will have increasing difficulty seeing one another in terms of rigid racial categories.

Ethnicity Race is a matter of what societies make of biological traits, but ethnicity is a matter of culture. Ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage, which typically involves common ancestors, language, and religion. Just as U.S. society is racially diverse, so the population contains hundreds of distinctive ethnic categories. Table 3–1 shows the breadth of this nation’s racial and ethnic diversity.

Although race and ethnicity are different, the two may go together. For example, Korean Americans, Native

Other physical traits often linked to race do not always line up the same way. For example, people with dark skin can have kinky hair (common in Africa) or straight hair (common in India). What this means is that from a scientific standpoint, physical variation is real, but racial categories

Racial or Ethnic Classification*

Approximate U.S. Population

Percent of Total Population

Hispanic Descent 55,199,107 17.3%

Mexican 35,110,480 11.0

Puerto Rican 5,275,008 1.7

Cuban 2,077,828 0.7

Other Hispanic 12,735,791 4.0

Non-Hispanic African Descent

40,893,369 12.7%

Nigerian 286,424 0.1

Ethiopian 233,789 0.1

Somalian 126,060 <

Other African 40,247,096 12.4

Non-Hispanic Native American Descent

2,084,326 0.7%

American Indian 2,555,417 0.8

Alaska Native Tribes 120,982 <

Other Native American 157,908 <

Non-Hispanic Asian or Pacific Island Descent

16,934,241 5.3%

Chinese 3,801,177 1.2

Asian Indian 3,456,447 1.1

Filipino 2,750,811 0.9

Vietnamese 1,719,260 0.5

Korean 1,447,180 0.5

Japanese 781,977 0.2

Pakistani 437,028 0.1

Other Asian or Pacific Islander

2,220,745 0.7

West Indian descent 3,019,686 0.9%

Arab descent 2,032,892 0.6%

Non-Hispanic European descent

197,824,618 62.0%

German 44,754,050 13.8

Irish 32,304,175 10.0

English 23,835,787 7.4

Italian 16,896,518 5.2

Polish 9,258,128 2.9

French 7,962,052 2.5

Scottish 5,658,914 1.8

Norwegian 4,421,962 1.4

Dutch 4,044,507 1.3

Two or more races 9,752,947 3.1%

Table 3–1 Racial and Ethnic Categories in the United States, 2016

*People (such as African Americans and American Indians) who say they are “non-Hispanic” may still identify with more than one ethnic category. Figures therefore total slightly more than 100 percent. “<” indicates less than 1/10 of 1 percent.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 73

falls into a racial or ethnic minority category, and this share is increasing. Minorities have already become a major- ity in 63 of the country’s 100 largest cities. (In Santa Ana, California, and Detroit, Michigan, minorities make up more than 90 percent of the population.) A minority majority also exists in four states—Hawaii, California, New Mexico, and Texas—as well as the District of Columbia, and Nevada (49 percent) and Maryland (48 percent) are very close. In 2012, for the first time, a majority of the children born in the United States were minorities, and in 2013, a minority majority existed among children younger than five. Over the next fifty years, analysts project, minorities will account for 88 percent of U.S. population increase. This means that, by about 2043, racial and ethnic minorities will become a majority of the U.S. population (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

We take up the question of whether women—of any race or ethnicity—should be counted as a minority in Chapter 4 (Gender inequality”).

White Privilege Just as minority standing confers disadvantages, so does majority standing provide privileges. The concept white privilege refers to the fact that white people, relative to those in minority categories, enjoy social advantages. Many people in the United States (especially those who are not minorities) do not easily understand the disadvantages faced by minority people. On the contrary, surveys show some whites feel resentment at apparent advantages given to minorities with little appreciation for the many ways minority standing is hurtful and harmful on a daily basis. In the same way, whites, who are the majority category, are even less likely to think of themselves as somehow privileged.

Americans, and people of Italian or Nigerian descent share not only certain physical traits but ethnic traits as well.

Minorities A hard reality of life in the United States and elsewhere in the world is that race and ethnicity are the basis for living with less—less money, fewer choices, and lower respect from others. Many people have also discovered that their race and ethnicity keep them at the margins of U.S. society. Sociologists use the term minority to refer to any category of people, identified by physical or cultural traits, that a society subjects to disadvantages.

Visibility Minorities share a distinctive identity, which may be based on race (physical traits, which are difficult to change) or ethnicity (including dress or accent, which peo- ple can change). Men and women of Japanese ancestry pro- vide an example of people changing their level of distinctive visibility. Many people of Japanese ancestry in the United States have little knowledge of their native language, most speak only English in their homes, and more than half of those who marry have non-Japanese partners. Thus, Japanese Americans have become less of an ethnic cate- gory, and by marrying people of other backgrounds, they are becoming less distinctive as a racial category as well.

A minority’s ability to blend in with others depends on the minority members’ desire to hold on to their traditions. It also depends on the willingness of other people to accept them. For instance, looking at government statistics, we see that whites have a greater willingness to marry people of Japanese ancestry than to marry people of African descent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; Bialik, 2017).

Power A second char- acteristic of minorities is social disadvantage. Because minorities typically have less schooling and hold lower-paying jobs, they experience higher rates of poverty. Of course, not all people in any minority cat- egory are disadvantaged. In other words, despite lower statistical averages, some people of African, Asian, or Latino ancestry have very high social standing. But even the most success- ful individuals know that a minority identity reduces their standing in some peo- ple’s eyes (Benjamin, 1991).

Numbers About 39 per- cent of the U.S. population

If minorities face prejudice and other social challenges, do non-minorities enjoy social advantages? People who answer “yes” claim that we need to acknowledge the reality of white privilege. Where do you stand on this issue?

Ju ic

e Im

ag es

/C ul

tu ra

/G et

ty Im

ag ea

s.

74 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

than 50 percent (Glaab & Brown, 1967; Kasnitz et al., 2006; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Nativists and the Quota System Many people extended a welcome to the newcomers, but others—called “nativists”— opposed the high level of immigration (as some do today), fearing that it would endanger this country’s mostly English culture. Nativist attitudes were especially common after the 1900 immigration flow shifted from northern Europe to south- ern and eastern Europe, where people had darker rather than lighter skin, spoke a language other than English, and were Catholic, Orthodox, or Jewish rather than Protestant.

Pressured by nativists, Congress soon enacted laws, including the Immigration Act of 1924, which cut immigra- tion and created a quota system that limited the number of people entering the United States from various countries around the world. These laws—coupled to the economic depression that began in 1929—reduced immigration to a trickle. The flow of immigrants to the United States stayed low until the mid-1960s.

The End of the Quota System In 1965, Congress ended the quota system, leading to another wave of mass immi- gration. Again, the arrival of immigrants—by then mostly from Mexico and other nations in Latin America as well as the Philippines, South Korea, and other Asian countries— became controversial. In 1986, Congress enacted the Immigrant Control and Reform Act in another effort to reduce the number of immigrants coming to this country. This act outlawed the hiring of undocumented immigrants and threatened businesses with fines for doing so. The idea was that if immigrants could not get jobs, they would not come here. But many workers produced fraudulent docu-

ments and were able to find work. In addi- tion, the 1986 law granted amnesty to almost 3 million illegal immigrants already in the country, which allowed these people to join the mainstream of U.S. society and probably also encouraged more people to cross the border (Gamboa, 2003; Tumulty, 2006).

Nowhere is the immigration issue more important than in California, the state with the largest immigrant population, a total of more than 10.7 million people or 27 percent of the state’s total popula- tion. In California, 44 percent of the peo- ple speak a language other than English at home. In 1994, in reaction to the rising number of illegal immigrants, Californians enacted Proposition 187, designed to discourage illegal immigration by cut- ting off social service benefits, including schooling, health care, and food stamps, to anyone entering the country illegally. This law, however, was later declared

But white privilege is a reality. A white person who receives a housing loan from a bank probably never thinks that race has made the process easier. But research shows that, everything else equal, white people do have greater success than black people in obtaining a bank mortgage. In the same way, young white people who hang out on a street corner are unlikely to consider how their race protects them. But African Americans who do the same thing are at far higher risk of violence—from other people or from police. As one researcher asked, how many white parents worry about their children being killed when they go out to play? How many African American parents can honestly say that they never worry about the same thing? (Biss, 2015).

Immigration This country’s remarkable racial and ethnic diversity is a product of immigration. As noted previously, everyone living in North America is descended from people who lived elsewhere. Immigration is a key reason our society is here at all. Even so, immigration is a source of difference causing conflict. This conflict is nothing new, as you will soon see.

The “Great Immigration” What historians call the “Great Immigration” started with the end of the Civil War in 1865 and lasted until the outbreak of World War I in 1914. During this period, the Industrial Revolution created factory jobs that attracted some 25 million people from other countries who came to cities along the East Coast in search of eco- nomic opportunity. In 1900, fully 80 percent of the people living in New York City either had been born abroad or had parents who were. Today, the share is slightly more

The television show Fresh Off the Boat presents the hopes, dreams, and frustrations of the Huang family, who have made their way from Taiwan through Chinatown in the nation’s capital to Orlando, Florida. Our country is struggling not only to develop an immigration policy but also to understand the lives of the millions of people who recently have come to these shores. How can the mass media play a constructive part in this process?

N ic

ol e

W ild

er /D

is ne

y A

B C

T el

ev is

io n

G ro

up /G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 75

opposing that plan (Jones, 2017). Perhaps the most difficult question to resolve is what to do with the 800,000 young people who entered this country illegally as children. These “Dreamers” have been protected by an Obama-era program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA). About 75 percent of U.S. adults support giving legal status to “Dreamers.” By the end of 2018, Congress had yet to resolve the fate of these young people (Bier, 2017; Tyson, 2018). The Social Problems in Focus box takes a closer look at the current immigration issue.

Patterns of Majority–Minority Interaction 3.2 Describe four major societal patterns of interaction

between majority and minority populations.

The way majority and minority populations interact can range from peaceful to deadly. In studying such patterns, sociologists use four models: genocide, segregation, assim- ilation, and pluralism.

Genocide Genocide is the systematic killing of one category of people by another. Genocide amounts to mass murder. Even so, it has taken place time and again in human history, often con- doned and sometimes even encouraged by governments and their people.

Beginning about 1500, the Spanish, Portuguese, English, French, and Dutch forcefully colonized North and South America, a policy that resulted in the deaths of thousands of native people. Although most native people died from diseases brought by Europeans to which they had no natural defenses, many were also killed outright (Matthiessen, 1984; Sale, 1990).

In the 1930s and 1940s, Adolf Hitler and his Nazi gov- ernment murdered more than 6 million people that the Nazis defined as “undesirables,” including homosexu- als, people with disabilities, and most of Europe’s Jewish population. The Soviet dictator Josef Stalin slaughtered his country’s people on an even greater scale, killing some 30 million people, all of whom he defined as “enemies.” Between 1975 and 1980, Cambodia’s Communist regime butchered millions whom they saw as “Western” in their cultural patterns. In recent decades, Hutus massacred Tutsis in the African nation of Rwanda, Serbs systemati- cally killed Croats in Eastern Europe, and several hundred thousand people have been killed in the Darfur region of Africa’s Sudan. In addition, the Syrian civil war has killed as many as 500,000 people and displaced millions more. In 2016, the United States declared that ISIS was engaged in genocide against Christians and other minorities in Iraq and Syria (Isikoff, 2016).

to be unconstitutional by the courts. But the passage of this law did reduce illegal immigration and it also hurt those undocumented immigrants already in California.

The Current Immigration Controversy During the 1990s, Congress continued to debate the immigration issue and about 1 million people entered the United States each year. This flow represented a larger number of people entering the country than during the Great Immigration a century ago, although these recent immigrants joined a population five times larger. In 2016, the total U.S. population of about 319 million included about 42 million (13.2 percent) who were foreign-born. Almost as many people have at least one parent born abroad (Pew Research Center, 2015; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Especially since the election of Donald Trump, immi- gration has become a major issue across the United States, with the focus of the debate on illegal immigration. From a total of about 500,000 people annually during the years after 2000, the number of unauthorized immigrants fell during the recession that began in 2008. As the flow of people declined, the total number of undocumented immi- grants in the country decreased from a peak of 12.2 million in 2007 to about 11 million in 2009. The number of undoc- umented immigrants began to increase slowly in 2012 as the economy began to improve and has stayed fairly flat since then so that, by 2017, the total was about 11.3 million people (Baker & Rytina, 2013; Pew Research Center, 2015; Newhauser, 2017).

Controlling the nation’s southern border, which extends for almost 2,000 miles along the southern bound- aries of California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas, is a monumental task. Much of the border has no fence or marking at all. In 2000, more than 1.5 million people were apprehended attempting to enter the country ille- gally. By 2014, as a result of both tighter border security and the economic recession, the number of people appre- hended crossing the border had declined to about 316,000 that year. Donald Trump ran for office on the promise to reduce illegal immigration. After taking office, Trump ordered more aggressive border enforcement so that the number of people crossing the border declined signifi- cantly. Estimating the number of people who manage to avoid apprehension is difficult, obviously, but it is likely that at least 150,000 people continue to enter the country illegally each year (Pew Research Center, 2015; Newhauser, 2017).

Congress has debated various proposals intended to improve control of the border as well as decide how to deal with illegal immigrants already living and working in the United States. President Trump made the building of a bor- der wall the centerpiece of his campaign. To date, no such wall has been constructed and surveys show that just 40 percent of U.S. adults are in favor of a wall with 60 percent

76 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN FOCUS

Let Them Stay or Make Them Go? The Debate over Unauthorized Immigrants For years, Congress has debated the issue of comprehensive immigration reform. Despite enacting new laws in recent decades, most people in the United States think there is still much that needs to be done. However, exactly what the problem and the solution are is a matter of disagreement.

Almost everyone agrees on one fact: A main reason that people come to the United States is simple economics. Wages in the United States are about five times higher than in Mexico—the nation from which most undocumented immigrants arrive. A large majority of today’s undocumented immigrants arrive from lower-income nations. Among all people who have entered the United States illegally, about 56 percent are from Mexico, 15 percent are from other Latin American nations, 15 percent are from an Asian country, and the remaining 14 percent are from African countries and elsewhere (Zong & Batalova, 2017).

Many conservatives are troubled by high levels of immigration and even more are concerned about unauthorized immigration. They claim that entering the country illegally is a crime, so illegal immigrants should face arrest and some form of punishment or perhaps even deportation. Almost 3 million unauthorized immigrants—largely people convicted of serious crimes—were deported during the Obama administration between 2008 and 2016.

There are problems with such a “get tough” approach. For one thing, identifying and arresting an estimated 11.3 million people who are in this country illegally would be next to impossible, and there are simply not enough jails to lock up even half this many people. Even more important, any such effort would spread fear throughout immigrant communities and drive people into hiding. Finally, a policy of arrest and deportation would inevitably split up families.

Nonetheless, many conservatives claim that only tough measures will discourage even more people from coming to this country illegally. In addition, conservatives support efforts (including hiring more border patrol agents and perhaps building a wall) to make our borders more secure.

There is increasing support among moderate conservatives for allowing undocumented immigrants to stay in the United States as guest workers if they pay a fine, pay back taxes on their earnings, and go to the end of the line among people seeking citizenship.

About 30 percent of U.S. adults hold conservative views on the immigration debate. Typically, they believe that immigrants are a burden to the country because they are likely to receive welfare assistance or, if they work, they will compete with the existing workforce for jobs. Immigrants may also overtax our schools, health care system, and housing supply. Some conservatives also worry that immigrants’ ethnic differences will bring dramatic changes to U.S. culture (Pew Research Center, 2015).

Liberals tend to see immigrants as a positive presence in U.S. society. They point out that, through their hard work, most immigrants (whether documented or not) contribute to our economy, often doing jobs that others in our country do not want to do. Much low-wage labor on farms, at hotels and restaurants, and in private homes is performed by immigrants.

Liberals also remind us that more than 1 million of today’s undocumented immigrants are children. In 2012, the Obama administration created a program called Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA), which allows children who came to the United States illegally with their parents to apply for protection against deportation. To date, some 800,000 young people, often called “Dreamers,” have made use of this program successfully. Because about 75 percent of U.S. adults support giving legal status to “Dreamers,” it seems likely that Congress will find a way to provide a path to citizenship for these young people (U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 2015; Bier, 2017; Tyson, 2018).

Most liberals favor amnesty for unauthorized immigrants and want to give them a path to citizenship. They take this position as a way to free millions of men, women, and children from “living in the shadows,” with no chance to apply for a scholarship to go to a community college or even to get a driver’s license. Most seriously, liberals point out, illegal immigrants must live in constant fear that they or another family member may be arrested.

What is the radical-left position on the immigration debate? Radicals on the left oppose any efforts to wall off this country from the rest of the world and they support legalization and citizenship for all immigrants already here. Most important, they claim, the world must reduce the economic inequality that separates the United States from other countries. Until that happens, they claim, millions of people will keep coming to this country, many risking their lives in the process.

Keep in mind that the immigration debate has political consequences that could easily decide the outcome of presidential elections. Allowing all undocumented immigrants to become citizens would create more than 10 million new voters. In the 2016 presidential election, 66 percent of Hispanic or Latino voters supported Democrat Hillary Clinton and 28 percent voted for Republican Donald Trump (Pedraza & Wilcox- Archuleta, 2017).

What Do You Think? 1. Do you view immigrants as a benefit or a liability to our

society? Why?

2. What would you do to address the almost 12 million unau- thorized immigrants already living in this country? Why?

3. What do you think Congress will end up doing about this issue?

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 77

and Livonia, Michigan, right across the city’s boundary, is 91 percent white (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Intense segregation has been found in many inner-city areas. In 1989, Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton docu- mented the hypersegregation of some African Americans who have little contact with people outside of their com- munity. A study published a decade ago found that hyper- segregation affected just a few percent of poor white people but it affected one in four African Americans liv- ing in about twenty-five of the largest U.S. cities (Massey & Denton, 1989; Wilkes & Iceland, 2004). The number of hypersegregated cities in the United States has declined by half since 1970, but about twenty large cities continue to be racially divided to this extreme. In cities including Detroit and Chicago in the North and Memphis and Jackson, Mississippi, in the South, at least half of the African

Segregation Segregation is the physical and social separation of categories of people. Sometimes minority populations decide that they wish to segregate themselves; this is the case with religious orders such as the Amish. Usually, though, the majority pop- ulation causes segregation by forcing minorities to the mar- gins of society, where they have to “stay with their own.”

Racial segregation in the United States began with the economic policy of slavery and later included legally separate hotels, restaurants, schools, buses, and trains for people accord- ing to race. A number of court cases have largely eliminated de jure (Latin words meaning “by law”) segregation in the United States. However, de facto (“in fact”) segregation remains com- mon because most neighborhoods, schools, hospitals, prisons, and even cemeteries still contain mostly people of one race. For example, the city of Detroit is 80 percent African American,

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment: Saying No to Segregation A huge change to U.S. society began so routinely that no one would have known history was being made. On December 1, 1955, Rosa Louise Parks, a young African American woman living in Montgomery, Alabama, had just finished a day of hard work as a seamstress. She was tired and eager to get home. She walked to the street and boarded a city bus. At that time, Montgomery city law required African Americans to ride in seats designated for “coloreds” near the back of the bus, and Parks did exactly that. Slowly the bus filled with people. As the bus pulled to the curb to pick up some additional white passengers, the driver turned and asked four black people to give up their seats so that the white people could sit down. Three did as he asked. But Parks refused to move.

Seeing Parks’s response, the driver pulled the bus to the curb, stepped out of the door, and returned a few minutes later with a police officer, who arrested Parks for breaking the city’s segregation law. She appeared in court, and a judge found her guilty as charged and fined her $14.

The story of Parks’s stand (or sitting) for justice quickly spread throughout the African American community. In the age before cell phones and Twitter, activists printed and distributed thousands of handbills asking every African American to stay off the buses the following Monday to protest the arrest and trial and to demand an end to segregation of the city’s public buses. “You can afford to stay out of school for one day. If you work, take a cab, or walk. But please, children and grown-ups, don’t ride the bus at all on Monday. Please stay off the buses Monday.”

African Americans in Montgomery successfully boycotted city buses on that Monday. And the next day. And for 382 days after that. A huge social movement was under way that forced the city of Montgomery to officially end segregation on its buses. Nine years later, in 1964, the U.S. Supreme Court banned racial segregation in any and all public accommodations across the country.

Rosa Parks lived the rest of her life as a symbol of the quiet determination to achieve justice. When she died in 2005, she was hailed as the mother of the modern civil rights movement in the United States, and her funeral was attended by national leaders including three presidents. She will be remembered as a leader of the civil rights movement and as proof of the power of people—even one at a time—to change the world.

This photo shows Rosa Parks being fingerprinted by police in Montgomery, Alabama. At the time of her arrest, the law de- fined Parks as the problem. But the bus boycott that followed her arrest soon changed that, defining racial segregation as the problem.

G en

e H

er ric

k/ A

P Im

ag es

.

78 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

alter their cultural values, and even affiliate with a new religion.

Many people think of the United States as a “melt- ing pot” where the different ways of immigrants blend to produce one national lifestyle. There is some truth to this image, but a closer look shows that minorities are the ones who do most of the changing as they adopt the cul- tural patterns of more powerful people who have been here longer. In some cases, minorities imitate people they regard as their “betters” in order to escape hostility and to move up socially. In many cases, however, the major- ity population forces change on minorities. For example, by 2018, legislatures in thirty-one states had enacted laws making English the official language. National Map 3–1 shows the share of people who speak a language other than English at home in counties across the United States.

The amount of assimilation on the part of minorities also depends on where they live. Latinas and Latinos living in Ohio or New Hampshire (where they represent a very small share of the population) are more likely to speak English than their counterparts living in south Texas along the Mexican border where, in many communities, Spanish-speaking

American population still resides in racially segregated neighborhoods. But as a result of migration of African Americans (especially to suburbs and to Sun Belt cities), changes in mortgage lending policies that support racial integration, and a social climate of increasing racial accep- tance, researchers claim that U.S. cities are now less racially segregated than they have been in a century (Glaeser & Vigdor, 2012; Knoll, 2015; Sauter, Comen, & Stebbing, 2017).

Because minorities, by definition, have little power, challenging segregation is not easy and may even be dan- gerous. Sometimes, however, the actions of a single per- son do make a difference. The Defining Moment feature describes the actions of Rosa Parks, who sparked a social movement to end segregation on buses and other forms of public transportation throughout the South.

Assimilation Assimilation is the process by which minorities gradually adopt cultural patterns from the dominant majority population. When minorities—especially new immigrants—assimilate, they may change their styles of dress, use a new language,

Elvira Martinez lives in Zapata County, Texas, where about 87% of the people in her community speak Spanish at home.

Jeffrey Steen lives in Adams County, Ohio, where almost none of his neighbors speak a language other than English.

Percentage of Population That Speaks a Language Other Than English at Home

60.0% or more

30.0% to 59.9%

15.0% to 29.9%

4.0% to 14.9%

Less than 4.0%

U.S. average: 21.1%

LOUISIANA

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C.

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

MAINE

FLORIDA

ALABAMA

ALASKA

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA

NORTH DAKOTA

MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY NORTH

CAROLINA

WEST VIRGINIA

UTAH

VERMONT

HAWAII

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

Seeing Ourselves National Map 3–1 Language Diversity across the United States

Of nearly 300 million people age five or older in the United States, the Census Bureau reports that 63 million (21.1 percent) speak a language other than English at home. Of these people, 62 percent speak Spanish and 16 percent use an Asian language (the Census Bureau lists thirty-nine languages and language categories, each of which is favored by more than 100,000 people). The map shows that non-English speakers are concentrated in certain regions of the country. Which ones? Can you explain this pattern?

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 79

called “bringing civilization to the New World” was to Native Americans the destruction of their ancient and thriving civilizations. From a population in the millions before Europeans arrived, the number of “vanishing Americans” fell to barely 250,000 by 1900 (Dobyns, 1966; Tyler, 1973).

At first, the U.S. government viewed native peoples as independent nations and tried to gain land from them through treaties. But the government was quick to use superior military power against any who resisted. In the 1830s, soldiers forcibly removed the Cherokee and other Indian nations from their homelands in the southeastern United States, causing thousands of deaths along what came to be known as the Trail of Tears. By 1850, few native people remained along the East Coast.

In 1871, the United States declared American Indians wards of the federal government. At this point, the official goal was assimilation. This meant remaking native peoples as “Americans” by moving them to reservations where they were forced to adopt Christianity in place of their traditional religions and where schools taught children English in place of their ancestral language.

Since gaining full citizenship in 1924, many American Indians have assimilated, marrying people of other backgrounds. Yet many American Indians still live on res- ervations where poverty rates are very high. As Table 3–2 shows, American Indians remain disadvantaged, with below-average income, a high rate of poverty, and a low rate of college graduation.

In the past decade, American Indian organizations have received a large number of new membership appli- cations, and many children are learning to speak native

people are a numerical majority. Of course, wherever they live, some minority categories end up assimilating more than others. Looking back over the decades, we also see that German and Irish people have “melted” more than Italians, and Japanese people have assimilated more than people from China or Korea.

Pluralism Pluralism is a state in which people of all racial and ethnic categories have about the same overall social standing. Pluralism represents a situation in which no minority category enjoys great priv- ileges or is subject to disadvantage. The United States is pluralistic to the extent that—officially, at least—all peo- ple have equal standing under the law. But in reality, tolerance for diversity (both among people in the majority and including one minority population’s tolerance for another) is limited. As just noted, for example, thirty-one states have passed laws designating English as their official lan- guage. In addition, the United States is not truly pluralistic because the social standing of most minority populations is below that of the white, European-origin majority.

The Social Standing of U.S. Minorities 3.3 Analyze the social standing of major racial and

ethnic categories of the U.S. population.

The United States is a nation built on racial and ethnic diversity. In order to better understand today’s racial and ethnic inequality, it is important to know something of the history of the largest minority categories. The following sections provide brief historical profiles.

Native Americans Native Americans, many of whom now prefer to be called “American Indians,” are descendants of the first people to come to North America across the Bering Strait from Asia. Over thousands of years, they spread throughout the hemisphere, forming hundreds of distinct societies. These included the Aleuts and Eskimos (in Alaska), the Cherokee, Zuni, Sioux, and Iroquois (farther to the south), the Aztec (in Central America), and the Inca (in South America).

By 1500, the arrival of European explorers and colo- nizers began centuries of conflict. What some Europeans

Despite media reports of the financial success that legal gambling on reservations has brought to some American Indians, the majority of native people in the United States are greatly disadvantaged. Scenes such as this one from the Hopi reservation near Tuba City, Arizona, are more the rule than the exception.

K ev

in F

le m

in g/

C or

bi s

D oc

um en

ta ry

/V C

G /G

et ty

Im ag

es .

80 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

meet this demand for labor, slave traders (including Arabs and Africans as well as Europeans and North Americans) transported human beings across the Atlantic Ocean, in chains and under horrific conditions with full support of the law. Before 1808, when the United States declared the slave trade illegal, 500,000 Africans were brought to the United States, and 9.5 million came to other countries in the Americas, North and South. Keep in mind that this total represents just half the number who left Africa—the other half died during the brutal journey (Tannenbaum, 1946; Franklin, 1967; Sowell, 1981).

Under the law and according to the norms of the time, owners administered what discipline they wished to slaves in order to force them to do just about anything. For their part, slaves had neither legal rights nor the opportunity to attend school. Slave owners routinely separated families as they traded men, women, and children for profit.

Not all people of African descent living in the United States were slaves. Roughly 1 million free persons of color lived in the North and the South. Most of these people farmed small parcels of land, worked at skilled jobs in cit- ies, or operated shops or small businesses.

How could slavery exist in a society whose Declaration of Independence claimed that “all men are created equal” and entitled to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”? The obvious contradiction had to be resolved. But rather than making all people free, national leaders decided that African Americans were not really people. In the 1857 Dred Scott case, the U.S. Supreme Court officially supported the widespread belief that slaves were not citizens entitled to the rights and protections of U.S. law.

In the northern states, where expanding industry meant that slavery had less economic value, the practice gradually came to an end. In the South, where the agrar- ian economy depended on human labor, it took the Civil War to abolish slavery. On January 1, 1863, as the guns of war roared, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which declared that slavery was abolished in the breakaway southern Confederacy. When the fighting ended in 1865, Congress banned slavery everywhere in the country with the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. In 1868, the Fourteenth Amendment reversed the Dred Scott decision, giving citizenship to all people, regardless of race, born in the United States.

languages better than their parents (Nagel, 1996; Martin, 1997). These organizations are actively trying to improve the portrayal of native people in public life. A number of sports teams continue to use Indian caricatures in ways that many American Indians find offensive. The Cleveland Indians recently announced that the team would abandon the “Chief Wahoo” logo beginning in 2019. The logo, which originated in 1948, has long offended many people, espe- cially Native Americans. More broadly, research shows that the mass media very rarely present American Indians in today’s world, and in the few cases where Indian people are shown, almost all are associated with poverty or addic- tion (Qureshi, 2016; Waldstein, 2018).

In fact, many American Indians operate a wide range of successful businesses and engage in professional work. It is widely known that some tribes have used the legal autonomy of reservations to build gambling casinos. These casinos produce enormous profits, but this wealth has enriched only a few native tribes, with most of the money going to non-Indian investors. In fact, if all the money earned by casinos on Indian land were divided equally among all American Indians, one person’s share (about $11,000) would not be enough to exceed the pov- erty line (Bartlett & Steele, 2002; Native American Rights Fund, 2018). Overall, while some prosper, about one-fourth of American Indians remain on reservations and most American Indians remain severely disadvantaged and share a profound sense of historical injustice suffered at the hands of white people.

African Americans People of African ancestry arrived in the Americas along with the first European explorers. After 1619, however, when a Dutch trading ship delivered twenty Africans to Jamestown, Virginia, to work for whites, people came to see dark skin as a marker of subordination. In 1661, Virginia enacted the first slave law. By 1776, the year the United States declared its independence from Great Britain, slav- ery was legal in every state, and African Americans labored as slaves throughout the North as well as the South.

The demand for slaves was especially high in the South, where the plantation system required large num- bers of people to work the cotton and tobacco fields. To

Median Family Income

Percentage Living in Poverty

Percentage with Four or More Years of College

(age 25 and over)

Entire U.S. Population $67,871 12.7% 30.3%

Native Americans 45,004 27.6 14.5

Table 3–2 The Social Standing of Native Americans, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 81

But African Americans’ struggle for full participation in U.S. society is far from over. People of African descent are still disadvantaged, a fact supported by the data shown in Table 3–3. African American families still have below-average income, and the black poverty rate is more than twice as high as the white poverty rate. Although about 87 percent of African Americans now complete high school, their college graduation rate is well below the national average.

By 2016, 45 percent of African American families earned more than $50,000 a year. But most black families remain in the working class, and about one in four lives below the poverty line. On average, African American families earn just 65 percent as much as white families. One reason for the continued economic struggle of African Americans is that factory jobs, a key source of income for people living in central cities, have moved away from the United States to countries with lower labor costs. This loss of jobs helps to explain why black unemployment is double the rate among white people. Among African American teenagers (ages sixteen to nineteen), the unemployment rate in 2017 was 16.2 percent (twice the rate of white youth) (Wilson, 1996; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; U.S. Department of Labor, 2017).

But ending slavery did not mean ending racial discrimination. States soon enacted what came to be known as “Jim Crow laws,” which barred black people from voting and sitting on juries and called for segregated trains, restau- rants, hotels, and other public places (Woodward, 1974).

After World War I, when Congress closed the borders to further immi- gration, the need for labor in the booming factories sparked the “Great Migration,” which drew tens of thou- sands of men and women of color from the rural South to the industrialized cities of the North. These were times of great achievements in African American life as, for example, the Harlem Renaissance (centered in Harlem, the large African American community in New York City) produced writers such as Langston Hughes and musicians such as Duke Ellington and Louis Armstrong. Even so, racial segregation in neighborhoods, schools, and jobs was a way of life in most of the United States.

But change was coming. In 1948, President Harry Truman declared an end to segregation in the U.S. military. Black legal scholars, including Thurgood Marshall (1908– 1993), who later served for thirty years on the U.S. Supreme Court, led an attack on school segregation, leading to the 1954 case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka (Kansas). In this landmark decision, the Supreme Court rejected the practice of teaching black and white children in schools that segregationists claimed were “separate but equal.”

A year later, the heroic action of Rosa Parks sparked the bus boycott that desegregated public transportation in Montgomery, Alabama. In the next decade, the federal gov- ernment passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (prohibiting segregation in employment and public accommodations), the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (banning voting require- ments that prevented African Americans from having a political voice), and the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (which outlawed discrimination in housing). Together, these laws brought an end to most legal discrimination in public life.

The mass media played a powerful role in the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Televised scenes such as this one in Birmingham, Alabama, when police turned dogs and fire hoses on demonstrators, changed the mood of the nation in favor of the idea that all people should have equal opportunity and equal standing before the law.

Median Family Income

Percentage Living in Poverty

Percentage with Four or More Years of College

(age 25 and over)

Entire U.S. Population $67,871 12.7% 30.3%

African Americans 44,531 26.2 21.0

Table 3–3 The Social Standing of African Americans, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

B ill

H ud

so n/

A P

Im ag

es .

82 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Asian men from marrying non-Asian women. Such norms were soon enacted into law, beginning in 1920, as California and other states passed laws banning interracial marriage outright.

Many Asians settled in urban neighborhoods where they could help one another. Chinatowns soon flourished in San Francisco, New York, and other large cities, and many found work in Chinese-owned restaurants, laun- dries, and other small businesses. Self-employment has been popular not only among the Chinese but also among all minorities who find few employers willing to hire them for good wages.

World War II brought important changes to both the Japanese American and Chinese American popula- tions. The war in the Pacific began in 1941 when Japan attacked Hawaii’s Pearl Harbor naval base. The military strike stunned the United States, and many people won- dered which side Japanese Americans would take in the conflict. Japanese Americans always remained loyal to the United States. But fear of Japan’s industrial and mili- tary might, coupled with racial hostility, pushed President Franklin Roosevelt to issue Executive Order 9066 in early 1942, forcibly relocating all people of Japanese ancestry to military camps in remote areas away from the coast. The order forced more than 100,000 Japanese Americans to sell their businesses, homes, and farms for a fraction of their true value. Taken to camps, they lived under the watchful eyes of armed soldiers until 1944, when the U.S. Supreme Court declared the relocation policy unconstitutional. In 1988, Congress declared that this action had been wrong and awarded a symbolic compensation of $20,000 to each surviving camp inmate (Ewers, 2008).

Because China joined the United States in the fight against Japan, in 1943 the federal government ended the 1882 ban on Chinese immigration and gave U.S. citizen- ship to Chinese Americans born abroad. After the war, in 1952, the same offer was extended to foreign-born Japanese Americans.

In the postwar period, many young people of Chinese and Japanese descent entered college, believing that more schooling was the key to success. By the 1980s, based on their cultural emphasis on study and hard work, Asian Americans were finding themselves described as the “model minority.”

As Table 3–4 shows, all categories of Asian Americans now have above-average income and education. So there is some truth to the “model minority” idea. But poverty rates also are close to or even above the national average for some categories of Asian Americans. In addition, the “model minority” stereotype is misleading because many Asian families have multiple wage earners working long and hard in low-paying jobs.

Some Asian Americans live in distinctive commu- nities. The Chinatowns and Little Tokyos found in some

Asian Americans Asian Americans include people with historical ties to any of several dozen Asian nations. The largest number of Asian Americans have roots in China (3.8 million), India (3.5 million), the Philippines (2.8 million), Vietnam (1.7 million), South Korea (1.4 million), and Japan (782,000). In 2016, Asian Americans numbered more than 17 mil- lion, which was 5.4 percent of the total U.S. population. According to the Census Bureau, Asian Americans are the fastest-increasing racial or ethnic category of the U.S. pop- ulation, with most of the increase coming from immigra- tion (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

The flow of immigrants from China and Japan to North America began back in 1849 when the Gold Rush in California created a demand for laborers. Chinese men answered the call, numbering 100,000 within a genera- tion, and they were joined by a much smaller number of Japanese immigrants. As long as cheap labor was needed, whites welcomed them.

But as the economy slowed, whites began to view Asian immigrants as an economic threat and soon labeled them the “Yellow Peril.” Legislatures and courts were pres- sured to bar Asians from certain jobs. In 1882, the federal government went even further and passed the Chinese Exclusion Act, which ended the flow of new immigrants from China. A similar law directed against Japan was enacted in 1908. These laws caused the Asian population in the United States to decline because almost all the peo- ple already here were men, and racial hostility prevented

From 1942 until 1944, more than 100,000 men, women, and children of Japanese ancestry were forced to live in military detention camps. This policy took away not just Japanese Americans’ liberty but also most of their property because it forced families to sell homes and businesses for a small share of what they were really worth.

B et

tm an

n/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 83

Hispanic Americans/Latinos Hispanic Americans, also known as “Latinas” and “Latinos,” are people with cultural roots in the nations of Central and South America, the Caribbean, the Philippines, and Spain. As a result, there are many Latino/a cultures. On the 2010 Census Bureau forms, people of any race could identify themselves as being Hispanic or Latino/a. In racial terms, about half of all Latinos described them- selves as white, 6 percent said they are multiracial, and 4 percent indicated that they are black. The remainder claimed to identify primarily with Mexico, Puerto Rico, or some other nation (U.S. Census Bureau, 2011).

In 2016, the official Hispanic population of the United States stood at 55.2 million, making Hispanics the largest U.S. minority with 17.3 percent of the population (exceed- ing non-Hispanic African Americans at 39.7 million, or 12.3 percent).

National Map 3–2 shows the geographical concen- tration of Latinos—as well as African Americans, Asian Americans, and Arab Americans—across the United States. Many Latinos reside in the Southwest because almost two-thirds (35 million) are of Mexican origin. Next in terms of numbers are Puerto Ricans (5.3 million) and Cuban Americans (2.1 million) and smaller numbers from dozens of other nations. Overall, Latinos are so numer- ous and their cultural contributions so great that Spanish has become the unofficial second language of the United States.

Many Mexican Americans had lived for centuries on lands that came under U.S. control following the Mexican War (1846–1848) and became what are now Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, Utah, California, and Colorado. Others are new arrivals, drawn to the United States by a desire for higher wages and greater economic opportunity.

Puerto Rico, an island controlled by Spain for about 300 years, became a U.S. territory in 1898 at the end of the Spanish-American War. Since 1917, all island res- idents have been U.S. citizens, although Puerto Rico is a commonwealth and not a state. The largest Puerto Rican

large cities may provide their people with social support, but they can also limit job opportunities by discourag- ing their residents from learning English (Kinkead, 1992; Gilbertson & Gurak, 1993).

Today, more than 40 percent of all immigrants to the United States each year are from an Asian nation. Researchers project that Asian Americans will outnumber Hispanic Americans to become the largest minority cate- gory in this country by 2050 (Pew Research Center, 2015).

Many Asian Americans, especially those with high social standing, have assimilated into the larger cultural mix. For example, very few Japanese Americans live in racially segregated neighborhoods. In fact, most people of Japanese ancestry marry someone of another racial and ethnic background.

Keep in mind, too, that “Asian American” is a large cat- egory made up of many distinctive communities. Although most Japanese Americans have assimilated, many Korean Americans follow the example of immigrants a century ago and settle in ethnic neighborhoods, sometimes for pro- tection from racial and ethnic hostility.

The lives of Filipino Americans illustrate the complex- ity of establishing a racial and ethnic identity. A recent study of young Filipino Americans living in Los Angeles found that less than half considered themselves to be Asian (com- pared with about 95 percent of people of Chinese, Japanese, and Vietnamese descent living in that city). Many young Filipinos call themselves Asian, but just as many consider themselves to be Latino, reflecting the fact that Spain dom- inated the Philippines for 300 years. Some Filipinos also report switching identities according to their location, iden- tifying themselves as Asian in the company of people from other Asian nations and taking on a Latino identity among people with Spanish heritage (Ocampo, 2016).

In general, Asian Americans have fared better than most minorities. Even so, anti-Asian prejudice remains strong (Chua-Eoan, 2000; Parrillo, 2003; Parrillo & Donoghue, 2005; Parrillo & Donoghue, 2013). Many Asian Americans remain socially marginal, living in two worlds while fully belonging to neither one.

Median Family Income

Percentage Living in Poverty

Percentage with Four or More Years of College

(age 25 and over)

Entire U.S. Population $67,871 12.7% 30.3%

All Asian Americans 87,834 12.3 53.2

Chinese Americans 85,233 15.5 53.5

Japanese Americans 95,169 8.1 49.4

Korean Americans 70,975 14.4 54.1

Asian Indian Americans 110,904 7.7 72.7

Table 3–4 The Social Standing of Asian Americans, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

84 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Many Cubans fled to the United States after the revo- lution led by Fidel Castro gained control of their nation in 1959. These men and women, numbering several hundred thousand, included many affluent businesspeople and professionals. Most settled in Miami, Florida, where they established a vibrant Cuban American community.

Table 3–5 shows that the social standing of Hispanic Americans is below the U.S. average. However, various categories of Latinos have somewhat different rankings.

community off the island traditionally has been New York’s Spanish Harlem. Since 1990, an outflow of people to the suburbs and also movement back to Puerto Rico reduced New York’s Puerto Rican population from almost 900,000 to about 695,000 in 2017. Especially after Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico in 2017, most immigrants came to Florida, which now has a Puerto Rican population that exceeds 1 million people (Krogstad et al., 2107; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

95.0% or more 70.0% to 94.9% 50.0% to 69.9% 25.0% to 49.9% 12.5% to 24.9% 5.0% to 12.4% 2.0% to 4.9% 0.0% to 1.9%

U.S. average: 17.8%

Hispanic/Latino GA

AK

HI

AZ

NV

CA

OR

WA

ID

MT ND MN

SD

NE

WY

CO

NM

TX LA

AROK

KS MO

IA

WI MI

IN OH

KY

TN

MS AL

SC

NC

VA D.C. WV

DE NJ

MD

PA CT RI

MEVT

NH MA

FL

UT IL

NY

Seeing Ourselves National Map 3–2 The Concentration of Hispanics/Latinos, African Americans,

Asian Americans, and Arab Americans, by County

In 2016, Hispanic Americans represented 17.3 percent of the U.S. population, compared with 12.3 percent for non-Hispanic African Americans, 5.4 percent for non-Hispanic Asian Americans, and 0.2 percent for Arab Americans. These four maps show the geographic distribution of these categories of people in 2016. Comparing them, we see that the southern half of the United States is home to far more minorities than the northern half. But do the four minority categories concentrate in the same areas? What patterns do the maps reveal?

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

African American 70.0% or more 50.0% to 69.9% 25.0% to 49.9% 12.0% to 24.9% 5.0% to 11.9% 1.0% to 4.9% 0.0% to 0.9%

U.S. average: 13.3%

AZ

NV

CA

OR

WA

ID

MT ND MN

SD

NE

WY

CO

NM

HI

AK TX LA

AROK

KS MO

IA

WI MI

IL IN OH

KY

TN

MS AL GA

SC

NC

VA D.C. WV

DE NJ

MD

PA

NY

CT RI

MEVT

NH MA

FL

UT

Asian American 25.0% or more 12.5% to 24.9% 3.5% to 12.4% 1.0% to 3.4% 0.0% to 0.9%

U.S. average: 5.7%

AK

HI

AZ

NV

CA

OR

WA

ID

MT ND

MN

SD

NE

WY

CO

NM

TX LA

AROK

KS MO

IA

WI MI

IL IN OH

KY

TN

MS AL GA

SC

NC

VA D.C. WV

DE NJ

MD

PA

NY

CT RI

MEVT

NH MA

FL

UT

Arab American 1.2% or more 0.7% to 1.1% 0.4% to 0.6% 0.2% to 0.3% 0.0% to 0.1%

U.S. average: 0.2%

Arab Ame 1.2% o 0.7% t 0.4% t 0.2% t 0.0% t

AZ

NV

CA

OR

WA

ID

MT ND

MN

SD

NE

WY

CO

NM

TX LA

AROK

KS MO

IA

WI MI

IL IN OH

KY

TN

MS AL GA

SC

NC

VA D.C. WV

DE NJ

MD

PA

NY

CT RI

MEVT

NH MA

FL

UT

AK

HI

Median Family Income

Percentage Living in Poverty

Percentage with Four or More Years of College

(age 25 and over)

Entire U.S. Population $67,871 12.7% 30.3%

All Hispanics 46,249 23.4 15.3

Mexican Americans 42,881 25.7 10.4

Puerto Ricans 44,903 26.0 18.0

Cuban Americans 50,432 18.8 25.3

Table 3–5 The Social Standing of Hispanic Americans, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 85

world’s Muslims actually live in Asia rather than Africa or the Middle East, and they are not Arabs.

Immigration to the United States from many nations means that Arab Americans are culturally diverse. Some Arab Americans are Muslims and some are not; some speak Arabic and some do not; some maintain the tradi- tions of their homeland and some do not. As is the case with Hispanic Americans and Asian Americans, some are recent immigrants and some have lived in the United States for decades or even for generations.

Officially, the government counts 2 million Arab Americans, but because many people may choose not to declare their ethnic background on a census form, the actual number might be 3 or 4 million or about 1 per- cent of the population. The largest populations of Arab Americans have ancestral ties to Lebanon (27 percent of all Arab Americans), Egypt (13 percent), and Syria (9 percent). Most Arab Americans (70 percent) report ancestral ties to a single nation, but 30 percent report both Arab and non-Arab ancestry (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). A look at National Map 3–2 shows the distribution of the Arab American population throughout the United States.

Arab Americans are diverse in terms of social class. Some are highly educated professionals who work as phy- sicians, engineers, and professors; others are working-class people who perform various skilled jobs in factories or on construction sites; still others do service work in restau- rants, hospitals, or other settings, and some work in small family businesses. Overall, as shown in Table 3–6, median family income for Arab Americans is slightly below the national average ($63,997 compared with a national median of $67,871 in 2016), and Arab Americans have a higher than

The most advantaged are Cuban Americans, who have higher income and more schooling. Puerto Ricans occupy a mid- dle position in terms of income, although recent immigrants have a low rate of high school comple- tion. Mexican Americans have the lowest relative ranking, with median family income that is 63 percent of the national average. One reason for this disadvantage is that many Mexican Americans continue to speak only Spanish and not English, a pattern that can limit job opportunities.

Forty-six percent of Hispanic American families now earn at least $50,000 annually. But many challenges remain, including schools that are not well pre- pared to teach students whose first language is Spanish. Chapter 14 (“Education”) reports that 12 percent of Latinos between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four leave school without a high school diploma. In addition, their cultural differences—and, in some cases, dark skin—still spark hostility.

Overall, Hispanic Americans, now the largest ethnic category in the U.S. population, are a hugely important segment of our society. With more than 27 million Hispanic Americans eligible to vote in the 2016 elections, they repre- sented 12 percent of all eligible voters, and so they continue to draw the attention of leaders from all political parties (Pew Research Center, 2016).

Arab Americans Arab Americans are another U.S. minority that is increas- ing in size. Like Asian Americans and Latinos, these are people who trace their ancestry to one of various nations around the world, in this case countries in northern Africa or the Middle East. It is important to remember, however, that some of the people who live in one of the twenty-two nations that are considered part of the “Arab world” are not Arabs. For example, Morocco in northwestern Africa is home to the Berber people, just as Iraq in the Middle East is home to the Kurds.

Arab cultures are diverse but share use of the Arabic alphabet and language, and Islam is the dominant reli- gion. But once again, the term “Arab” refers to an ethnic category, and the word “Muslim” refers to a follower of Islam. A majority of the people living in Arab countries are Muslims, but some Arabs are Christians or followers of other religions. To make matters more complex, most of the

Some people in the United States link being Arab American or Muslim with support for anti-American terrorism. Why is this so? What can you suggest to eliminate this stereotype?

Je rr

y H

ol t/

Z U

M A

P R

E S

S /N

ew sc

om .

86 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Stereotypes A concept closely linked to prejudice is stereotype, an exaggerated description applied to every person in some category. The word stereo comes from the Greek word for “hard” or “solid,” suggesting a belief applied rigidly even if it is at odds with reality. For just about every racial or ethnic cat- egory, our culture contains stereotypes, which typically describe a category of people in negative terms. What ste- reotypes are conveyed in phrases such as “Dutch treat,” “French kiss,” “Russian roulette,” and “getting gypped” (a reference to Gypsies)?

We all form opinions about the world, identifying categories of people as “good” or “bad” in various ways. Generalizations about specific individuals that are based on actual experience may be quite valid. But racial or ethnic stereotypes are a problem to the extent that they assume that everyone in an entire category of people shares particular traits, as when a white person thinks all African Americans are unwilling to work hard or a person of color thinks every white person is hostile toward black people. Forming a judgment about another individual on the basis of actual personal experience is one thing, but when we evaluate others in a category before we have a chance to judge them as individuals, stereotypes dehu- manize people.

Racism The most serious example of prejudice is racism, the asser- tion that people of some racial category are less worthy than or even biologically inferior to others. Over the course of human history, people the world over have assumed they were superior to those they viewed as lesser human beings.

Why is racism so widespread? Because the claim that people are biologically inferior, although entirely wrong, can be used to justify making them socially inferior. For example, Europeans used racism to support the often bru- tal colonization of much of Latin America, Asia, and Africa. When Europeans spoke of the “white man’s burden,” they were claiming to be superior beings who had the obliga- tion to help “inferior” beings become more like them.

Even today, hundreds of hate groups in the United States continue to claim that minorities are inferior. In addition, subtle forms of racism are common in everyday life, as when people expect less of others because of race.

average poverty rate (23.4 percent versus 12.7 percent for the population as a whole). Even so, Arab Americans are highly educated; 47 percent over age twenty-five have a college degree compared with about 30 percent of the pop- ulation as a whole (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

A number of large U.S. cities—including New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Houston, and Dearborn (Michigan)—have large and visible Arab American com- munities. Even so, many Arab Americans choose to down- play their ethnicity as a strategy to avoid prejudice and discrimination. The fact that many of the terrorist attacks against the United States and other nations have been car- ried out by Arabs encourages some people to link being Arab (or Muslim) with being a terrorist. This attitude is unfair because it blames an entire category of people for the actions of a few individuals and ignores the fact that most deaths from terrorist violence in this country since 9/11 have been carried out by people with no Arab or Muslim identity. Since 2001, Arab Americans have been targets of a significant number of hate crimes, and many feel that they are subject to ethnic profiling that threatens their privacy and civil liberties (Ali & Juarez, 2003; Ali, Lipper, & Mack, 2004; Hagopian, 2004; Bergen, 2016).

Prejudice 3.4 Discuss the causes and consequences of prejudice.

The historical stories of various racial and ethnic minori- ties clearly illustrate the widespread problem of prejudice. Formally, prejudice is any rigid and unfounded generalization about an entire category of people. Prejudice is a prejudgment, an attitude one develops before interacting with any spe- cific person. Because such attitudes are not based on direct experience, prejudices are not only wrong but also difficult to change.

Prejudice can be both positive and negative. Positive prejudices lead us to assume that certain categories of people (usually others like ourselves) are better or smarter. Negative prejudices lead us to see those who differ from us as less worthy. Prejudices—both positive and negative—involve social class, gender, religion, age, sexual orientation, and political attitudes. But probably no dimensions of difference involve as many prejudices as race and ethnicity.

Median Family Income

Percentage Living in Poverty

Percentage with Four or More Years of College

(age 25 and over)

Entire U.S. Population $67,871 12.7% 30.3%

Arab Americans 63,997 23.4 47.0

Table 3–6 The Social Standing of Arab Americans, 2016

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 87

2. Today’s students see less difference between the various minorities. In the earliest studies, although students were very accepting of some people (scores between 1 and 2), they were not very accepting of other minorities (scores between 4 and 5). In the 2011 study, no minority received a score greater than 2.23.

3. The climate of concern over terrorism in the United States probably has increased prejudice against Arabs and Muslims. The current generation of stu- dents has grown up in a nation concerned about ter- rorism. The fact that the 9/11 attacks in 2001 were carried out by nineteen attackers who were Arabs and Muslims probably explains why students expressed the greatest social distance toward these categories. (After World War II, Parrillo and Donoghue found, both Japanese and German people were scored lower on social acceptance; similarly, during the Cold War of the 1950s, Russians received low scores.) Even so, not one student in the study said that Arabs or Muslims should be barred from the United States. Also, even the most prejudiced score by today’s students (Muslims, with a mean score of 2.23) shows much more tolerance than students back in 1977 expressed toward eighteen of the thirty minority categories.

Institutional Racism: The Case of Racial Profiling The studies we have just described involve prejudice at the level of individual attitudes. But to the extent that those attitudes are widespread, prejudice can be described as structural, that is, built into the operation of society itself. This idea underlies the work of Stokely Carmichael and Charles Hamilton (1967), who described institutional racism as racism at work in the operation of social institutions, including the economy, schools, hospitals, the military, and the criminal justice system. Whenever race guides the operation of any social institution to the disadvantage of a minority, institutional racism is at work.

Racial profiling—in which judges, prosecutors, police, or others in power consider race or ethnicity to be, by itself, a sign of probable guilt—illustrates the operation of institutional racism. This is not a matter of one preju- diced police officer thinking that, say, African Americans are potential criminals. Prejudice is institutional when such attitudes are part of the culture and policy of a police department—so that police routinely assume that a black person who comes to their attention is likely to be engaged in wrongdoing. Recent analysis of policing in two U.S. cities illustrates this problem. In Greensboro, North Carolina, data indicate that police were more than twice as likely to search an automobile driven by a black versus a white driver. In Chicago, African American drivers were

Measuring Prejudice: The Social Distance Scale Prejudice shapes everyday life as it draws us toward some categories of people and away from others. Early in the twentieth century, Emory Bogardus (1925) developed the social distance scale to measure prejudice among students at U.S. colleges and universities. Bogardus asked students how closely they were willing to interact with people in thirty racial and ethnic categories. Figure 3–1 shows the seven-point scale Bogardus used. At one extreme, people express very high social distance (high negative prejudice) when they say that some category of people should be barred from the country (point 7 in the figure). At the other extreme (little or no negative prejudice), people say they would accept members of some category into their family through marriage (Bogardus, 1925; Bogardus, 1967; Owen, Elsner, & McFaul, 1977).

Decades ago, Bogardus found that students, regardless of their own race and ethnicity, were most prejudiced against Latinos, African Americans, Asians, and Turks; they were willing to have these people as co-workers but not as neigh- bors, friends, or family members. At the other extreme, they were most accepting of the English, Scots, and Canadians, whom they were willing to have marry into their families.

Vincent Parrillo and Christopher Donoghue (2005, 2013) repeated the social distance study in 2001 and again in 2011 to see how more recent students felt about various minorities.1 There were three major findings:

1. The long-term trend is that students are more accept- ing of all minorities. Figure 3–1 shows that the average (mean) response on the social distance scale was 2.14 in 1925 and 1946, dropping to 2.08 in 1956, 1.92 in 1966, 1.93 in 1977, and 1.44 in 2001. In 2011, however, the average response was 1.68, suggesting that tolerance may have declined somewhat by 2011. Even so, notice that in the 2011 study, students (74 percent of whom described themselves as white) expressed much more acceptance of minorities than students did in earlier studies. Regarding African Americans, for example, students in 2011 assigned African Americans a score of 1.42 (suggesting high acceptance, even higher than the acceptance given to the Irish or French). In 1925, Bogardus found the average score given to African Americans was about 4 (showing far lower acceptance and giving African Americans the least amount of ac- ceptance of any racial or ethnic category).

1 In 2001, Parrillo and Donoghue dropped seven of Bogardus’s original categories (Armenians, Czechs, Finns, Norwegians, Scots, Swedes, and Turks) because they are no longer visible minori- ties and added nine new categories (Africans, Arabs, Cubans, Dominicans, Haitians, Jamaicans, Muslims, Puerto Ricans, and Vietnamese). This change probably encouraged higher social dis- tance scores, making the downward trend all the more significant.

88 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Causes of Prejudice What causes people to become prejudiced in the first place? The research presented so far points to two key factors: the personality of individuals and the structure of society itself.

Personality Factors T. W. Adorno and his colleagues (1950) claimed that prejudice is strong in people with an author- itarian personality. Such people feel a lot of hostility, rigidly conform to conventional norms, and see the world in stark contrasts of “right” versus “wrong” and “us” versus “them.” What creates such a personality? Adorno pointed to cold and demanding parents who fill their children with insecu- rity and anger. Fearful children, especially when they lack schooling, develop little tolerance of others and are quick to direct inner anger at people who differ from themselves.

Societal Factors Prejudice also results from the struc- ture of society itself. Scapegoat theory, for example, says that prejudice develops among people who are frustrated at

subject to a search five times more often than white drivers. At the same time, data also show that police were actually more likely to find contraband in cars operated by white drivers than black drivers, suggesting that racial prejudice is driving decisions by police (LaFraniere & Lehren, 2015).

The consequences of institutional prejudice may be deadly. If the workplace culture or the unofficial policy of a police department is to consider black persons more dangerous than whites, police may be quicker to draw their weapons when confronting black people, perhaps with tragic results. In recent years, a number of African Americans who turned out to be neither armed nor guilty of any crime have been killed by police who may well have reacted at least partly to their skin color.

Challenging any case of institutionalized racism is difficult. Police departments are part of society’s power structure and claim to serve the public interest. When institutional racism involves an organization with a lot of power, bringing about change can be difficult.

2 543 6 7

I would accept a [minority category] as a . . .

(a) Social Distance Scale

Mean Score for All Categories:

(b) Mean Social Distance Score by Category, 2011

1 family member by marriage.

family member by marriage

close friend.

I would bar from my country.

speaking acquaintance.

visitor to my country.

neighbor. co-worker.

(Less social distance 5 greater acceptance) (Greater social distance 5 less acceptance)

1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.8 1.9 2.5

close friend

2.0

Am er

ic an

s 1

.1 5

Ita lia

ns

1. 32

C an

ad ia

ns

1. 35

Br iti

sh

1. 36

Iri sh

1.

46 Fr

en ch

1.

50

C ub

an s

1 .7

4

G re

ek s

1 .5

2

G er

m an

s 1

.5 1

Af ric

an A

m er

ic an

s 1

.4 2

D ut

ch

1. 62

Je w

s 1

.7 4

Am er

ic an

In di

an s

1 .5

7

Af ric

an s

1 .6

1 Po

lis h

1 .6

4

O th

er H

is pa

ni cs

1.

72

C hi

ne se

1.

72

1.7

Fi lip

in os

1.

68

Pu er

to R

ic an

s 1

.6 4

Ja m

ai ca

ns 1

.7 4

R us

si an

s 1.

73

D om

in ic

an s

1 .7

1

Ja pa

ne se

1.

80 Ko

re an

s 1

.8 7

M ex

ic an

s 1

.8 0

In di

an s

(In di

a)

1. 89

Vi et

na m

es e

1 .8

5 H

ai tia

ns

1. 91

Ar ab

s 2.

16 M

us lim

s 2

.2 3

(c)

Range of Averages:

1925

2.14

2.85

1946

2.14

2.57

1956

2.08

1.75

1966

1.92

1.55

1977

1.93

1.38

2001

1.44

0.87

2011

1.68

1.08(d)

Diversity Snapshot Figure 3–1 Bogardus Social Distance Scale

Using this seven-point scale, Emory Bogardus and others have shown that people feel much closer to some categories of people than they do to others. Between 1925, when the study was first carried out, and 2001, the average social distance response dropped from 2.14 to 1.44, showing increasing tolerance of diversity. When this research was repeated in 2011, the average response showed a modest increase to 1.68, suggesting a slight decline in tolerance.

SOURCE: Parrillo & Donoghue (2005), Parrillo & Donoghue (2013).

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 89

and power to minorities, others (especially conservatives) claim that this approach divides society by downplaying what we have in common. The Latin phrase that appears on all U.S. currency—E pluribus unum—literally means “out of many, one.” Thus, the controversy over multicul- turalism is really about how much stress we should place on a single national identity and how much we should highlight differences.

Discrimination 3.5 Distinguish discrimination from prejudice and

show how the two concepts operate together.

Discrimination involves the unequal treatment of various categories of people. Prejudice is a matter of attitudes, but dis- crimination is a matter of actions. Like prejudice, discrim- ination can be positive or negative. We discriminate in a positive way when we single out people who do especially good work or when we provide special favors to family members or friends. We discriminate in a negative way when we put down others or avoid entire categories of people based on their race or ethnicity.

Few people would object to an employer who hires a job applicant with more schooling over one with less. But what if an employer favors one category of people (say, Christians) over another (say, Jews)? Unless a person’s reli- gion is directly related to the job (for example, if a church is hiring a priest), ruling out an entire category of people is wrongful discrimination, which violates the law.

Institutional Discrimination As in the case of prejudice, some discrimination involves the actions of individuals. For example, a restaurant owner might refuse to serve students with dark skin. Almost everyone condemns discrimination of this kind, and in a public setting such as a restaurant, it is against the law.

Institutional discrimination is discrimination that is built into the operation of social institutions, including the econ- omy, schools, and the legal system. A well-known example of institutional discrimination is this nation’s history of treat- ing black and white children differently by placing them in separate schools. As noted earlier, not until 1954 did civil rights activists succeed in overturning the legal doctrine of “separate but equal” schools, which, in the landmark case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the U.S. Supreme Court concluded was unconstitutional. But that did not end racial segregation in our country; more than half a cen- tury after the Brown decision, most children attend school sitting in classrooms surrounded by students of the same race (Kozol, 2005).

Institutional discrimination can involve policies that, on their face, seem to apply equally to everyone. Take the case of our legal system assigning court costs to those

their lack of control over their lives (Dollard et al., 1939). Working-class whites in southwestern Texas, for exam- ple, may feel anxious and angry at their lack of economic security, but where do they direct their anger? They might blame their political leaders, the people who run their communities, but speaking out against powerful people is often dangerous. A safer target would be the poor, illegal immigrants from Mexico who are willing to grab any job they can find, often at less than minimum wage. Scapegoat theory suggests that people direct their hostility at safe, less powerful targets such as illegal immigrants or other minorities. Because many of society’s least powerful peo- ple are minorities, they often end up as scapegoats blamed for a host of troubles that are not their fault.

Cultural theory claims that prejudice is built into our culture. An illustration of this is the research using Emory Bogardus’s social distance scale, described earlier in this chap- ter. Bogardus showed that most of us turn out to have the same kinds of prejudice, favoring certain categories of people and avoiding others. The fact that these attitudes are so widely shared suggests that prejudice is not a trait of deviant individ- uals as much as it is a normal part of our cultural system.

Multiculturalism Is there a way to address prejudice deeply rooted in our culture? One strategy for change is multiculturalism, edu- cational programs designed to recognize cultural diversity in the United States and to promote respect for all cultural traditions.

Multiculturalism claims, first, that U.S. society has long downplayed its cultural diversity. Schools have taught generations of children that the United States is a cultural “melting pot” that blends human diversity into a single cul- ture we call “American.” However, multiculturalism main- tains that our diverse population has “melted” far less than most people think. More correctly, race and ethnicity have formed a hierarchy. At the top, Europeans (especially the English) represent the cultural ideal of the well-informed, well-groomed, and well-behaved man and woman. What we call assimilation, from this point of view, is really a pro- cess of Anglicization as immigrants try to become more like the privileged white Anglo-Saxon Protestants (WASPs).

In addition, U.S. institutions—including schools, law, and the economy as well as dominant religions and fam- ily forms—are all modeled along Western European lines. Multiculturalists describe this bias as Eurocentrism, the practice of using European (particularly English) cultural stan- dards to judge everyone. To multiculturalists, U.S. culture is itself an expression of prejudice against people in this coun- try who differ from the dominant model. Multiculturalism asks that we rethink our national heritage and recognize the accomplishments not just of the cultural elite but also of people of every race and ethnicity.

Although there is strong support for multiculturalism (especially among liberals) because it gives more visibility

90 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

good jobs and raising their odds of going to jail and living in neighborhoods marked by poverty, drug abuse, and crime. As peo- ple see minorities in such conditions, this discrimination unleashes a new round of prejudice. And so it goes, around and around, forming a vicious circle that harms minorities.

Microaggression In recent years, the discussion of preju- dice and discrimination has expanded to include the concept of microaggression, casual actions, gestures, or words that demean people in some minority category.

The concept of microaggression was first used in the 1970s by Harvard Professor Chester M. Pierce to refer to sub- tle expressions of hostility directed against African Americans. In the decades that followed, activists have applied this con-

cept to hostile actions or gestures targeting any vulnerable category of people, including racial and ethnic minorities, disabled people, and transgender people.

In contrast to overt expression of hate, microaggression is subtle. In some cases, this behavior is intentional, as in the case of a white student blowing cigarette smoke toward the faces of African American students engaged in a campus pro- test. In other cases of microaggression, an actor may not have the conscious intention to insult others. Students who repeat widespread cultural beliefs (such as a statement that American Indians can’t handle alcohol) may not be conscious that their words are harmful to others in some minority category.

Microaggression may appear to be minor, but its effects on others can be significant. Those at greatest risk of experiencing microaggression are the same as those most often targeted for overt acts of hostility—people who fall within more than one minority category.

Affirmative Action: Reverse Discrimination or Cure for Prejudice? One strategy aimed at breaking the vicious circle of prej- udice and discrimination is affirmative action, policies intended to improve the social standing of minorities subject to past prejudice and discrimination. Affirmative action policies have changed over time, and they will continue to change in response to court rulings.

History of Affirmative Action After World War II, the federal government assisted veterans by funding educa- tion under what was known as the GI Bill, and minorities who might not otherwise have gone to college were able to enter classrooms across the country. By 1960, almost

convicted of a crime. One recent study points out that someone convicted of a felony in Alabama must pay court costs of $247 plus whatever the local county adds to this amount. Even traffic tickets can result in several hundred dollars in court costs. This policy applies equally to any convicted person, but the effect of the law is far greater for poor people than for rich people. Someone who cannot come up with the cash to pay court costs—which is the case for many poor people—ends up going to jail rather than going home (Meredith, Greenberg, & Morse, 2015).

Recent concern about institutional prejudice and discrim- ination centers on police directing the use of deadly violence toward African-American men. Survey research shows that African Americans are far more likely than whites to point to this type of institutional bias. In the 2014 case of a police officer firing on Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, about one-third of whites and two-thirds of African Americans said race played some part in the deadly shooting (Pew Research Center, 2014).

Prejudice and Discrimination: A Vicious Circle Prejudice and discrimination reinforce each other, main- taining social inequality over time. Let’s begin with how prejudice can lead to discrimination: If prejudiced white police officers think that most African Americans are crim- inals, they may well engage in racial profiling, stopping a large number of black motorists and being quick to arrest black citizens on the street. Such discrimination, especially if it is widespread or institutionalized, will overly criminal- ize African Americans, reducing their chances of finding

The law demands that people accused of serious crimes put up bail and also pay court costs. While the costs involved may not challenge affluent people, to men and women with low incomes, they may mean the difference between being released (to return to families and jobs) or going to jail.

R ic

h Le

gg /E

+/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 91

But opposition to affirmative action programs contin- ued. In 1995, the University of California system declared it would no longer consider race and gender when making any decision involving admission, hiring, or awarding a busi- ness contract. The following year, California voters passed Proposition 209, which required state agencies to operate without paying attention to race, ethnicity, or gender. A sim- ilar proposition passed in the state of Washington. Also in 1996, a federal district court declared (in Hopwood v. Texas) that race and gender could no longer be considered by public colleges and universities in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi.

Seeking a socially diverse student body, many col- leges and universities have tried to find a way around the new regulations. In Texas, for example, public universities admit all students in the top 10 percent of their high school class, a policy that ensures spaces for students from pre- dominantly African American and Latino schools.

In 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court once again addressed the issue of affirmative action. The case involved admission policies at the University of Michigan, a state university. In the undergraduate admissions process, applicants of under- represented minorities had received a numerical bonus that was added to a total score, which also reflected grades and College Board scores. The Supreme Court struck down this point system as too similar to the racial quota systems rejected by the Court in the past. However, the Court did say that colleges and universities could continue to take account of applicants’ race, along with other factors, with the goal of creating a racially diverse student body. In this administrative process, rather than a rigid point system, race was treated as one of several variables used in giv- ing each applicant individual consideration. In these deci- sions, the Court was affirming the national importance of allowing colleges and universities to create racially diverse

350,000 African Americans had used government help to earn a college degree. However, even with their school- ing, many of these men and women were not getting the types of jobs for which they were qualified. The Kennedy administration concluded that education alone could not overcome deep-seated, institutionalized prejudice and discrimination against people of color. So, as a strategy to reduce white privilege and level the playing field, officials devised a policy of affirmative action requiring employ- ers to “throw a wider net” to identify and hire qualified minority applicants. In the years that followed, employers hired thousands of African American women and men for good jobs, helping build the black middle class and reduc- ing racial prejudice.

By the 1970s, affirmative action was extended to include college admissions. In addition, policies emerged in the form of “quota systems” in which employers or col- leges set aside a certain number of places for minorities. Categories of people assisted by this policy also increased to include women, Hispanics, veterans, and in some cases people with physical disabilities.

The expansion of affirmative action provoked opposi- tion to this policy. In 1978, the Supreme Court heard the case of University of California Regents v. Bakke, brought by Allen Bakke, a white man who was denied admission to medical school at the University of California at Davis. The medical school had a policy of setting aside sixteen places (out of 100 in each entering class) for African Americans, Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Hispanic Americans. The court declared such rigid quotas to be illegal, but the justices did endorse the use of race and ethnicity in the process of admitting students or hiring employees in order to increase minority representation in settings from which minorities had historically been excluded.

Everyday social interaction can be distorted by racial hostility. Sociologists have coined the term “microaggression” to refer to the pattern by which one person makes assumptions about the character, abilities, or behavior of another based on race. Do you think people at all points in the political spectrum are likely to consider microaggression to be a social problem? Why or why not?

R ub

be rb

al l/I

va n

H un

te r/

G et

ty im

ag es

.

92 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

structural-functional, symbolic-interaction, and social- conflict approaches.

Structural-Functional Analysis: The Importance of Culture Structural-functional theory places great importance on how culture guides people’s behavior. To the extent that various racial and ethnic categories have different cultural orientations—for example, placing more or less emphasis on education—unequal social standing is the likely result.

The Culture of Poverty Chapter 2 (“Economic Inequality”) introduced the “culture of poverty” thesis of Oscar Lewis (1966). Lewis studied the low-income Puerto Rican popu- lations of San Juan and New York and found a widespread way of thinking that he called “fatalism.” This outlook leads people to accept their situation and to make the assump- tion that life is not likely to get better. Growing up poor and learning to accept that reality, young people develop low self-esteem, limited aspirations, and a sense of power- lessness. Over time, Lewis explained, they grow into adults who are not likely to take advantage of any opportunities that society might offer them.

Joan Albon made a similar claim about American Indians, whose traditional cultures tend to be coopera- tive and nonentrepreneurial, “in direct opposition to the principles of the modern, competitive, capitalistic order” (1971:387). Some African American peer groups have also been described as having an “oppositional culture” that discourages members from excelling by defining school achievement as “acting white” (Fordham & Ogbu, 1992). In such an environment, adds Shelby Steele (1990), a

campuses while at the same time stating that all applicants must be considered as individuals (Stout, 2003).

In 2013, the Supreme Court heard a case from Texas brought by Abigail Fisher, a white student who claimed that she was denied admission to the University of Texas while less qualified minority applicants were admitted. The Court did not rule on her complaint but instead sent the case back to a lower court with instructions that the court engage in “strict scrutiny” of the university admis- sions. This means that, rather than simply accepting the university’s claim that race is considered only as part of a larger process, the court must gather facts to verify that racial preference is needed to ensure student diversity and that the program gives race no more importance than is necessary to achieve that goal.

The United States continues to wrestle with the issue of affirmative action. Most people agree that society needs to give real opportunity to people in every racial and eth- nic category. But disagreement remains as to how to define affirmative action so that it becomes part of the solution rather than part of the problem (Fineman & Lipper, 2003; Kantrowitz & Wingert, 2003; Totenberg, 2013).

Theories of Racial and Ethnic Inequality 3.6 Apply sociological theory to patterns of racial

and ethnic inequality.

Why do the various racial and ethnic categories of the U.S. population have unequal social standing? The fol- lowing discussions draw answers from sociology’s

Throughout much of the United States until the 1960s, public facilities, including bus and railroad stations, were segregated by law. But even today, more than fifty years later, many familiar social settings are largely segregated, with most of the people being of one racial category.

C ha

rle s

A tk

in s/

A P

Im ag

es .

Ja ni

ne W

ie de

l P ho

to lib

ra ry

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 93

Social-Conflict Analysis: The Structure of Inequality Social-conflict theory claims that the unequal standing of minorities reflects the organization of society itself. Along with class, race and ethnicity operate as important dimen- sions of social inequality.

The Importance of Class Karl Marx traced the roots of social inequality to a society’s economy. As explained in Chapter 2 (“Economic Inequality”), Marx criticized cap- italism for concentrating wealth and power in the hands of a small elite. He explained that the capitalist elite, realizing that the strength of the working class lies in its greater numbers, tries to divide the workers by playing up racial and ethnic differences. Marx and his colleague Friedrich Engels pointed to the racial and ethnic diver- sity of the United States as the main reason U.S. work- ers had not come together to form a socialist movement. “Immigration,” Marx and Engels wrote,

divides the workers into. . . the native born and the foreigners, and the latter. . . into (1) the Irish, (2) the Germans, (3) many small groups, each of which understands only itself: Czechs, Poles, Italians. . . . And then the Negroes. To form a single party out of these requires unusually powerful in- centives. (1959:458, orig. 1893)

Marx and Engels hoped that increasing misery would eventually provide the incentive for workers to unify themselves into a politically active class. To some degree, this has happened, and a number of unions and worker organizations have memberships that are black and white, Anglo and Latino. However, racial and ethnic differences still divide the U.S. workforce as they do workers around the world.

Multicultural Theory Social-conflict theory also notes the importance of culture. A multicultural perspective claims that U.S. culture provides privileges to the dominant European, white majority while pushing racial and ethnic minorities to the margins of society.

Cultural hostility shaped the events of U.S. history. When Christopher Columbus landed in the Bahamas in 1492, he encountered Native Americans who were, on the whole, peaceful. Tragically, this gentleness made it easy for the more competitive and aggressive Europeans to take advantage of them. Yet, in another example of cultural bias, most of our historical accounts portray Europeans as heroic explorers and Native Americans as thieves and murderers (Matthiessen, 1984; Sale, 1990).

As W. E. B. Du Bois noted, bias involving race and eth- nicity is still part of everyday life. Take the common case in which people assume that “classical music” refers only to European and not to Chinese, Indian, or Zulu compositions of a certain period. Cultural bias also leads people to apply the

successful man or woman of color risks being accused by others of not being a “real” African American.

EVALUATE

Few people doubt that culture matters in shaping people’s lives. But critics of this theory claim that focusing on culture amounts to defining people as responsible for their own disadvantage—what Chapter 2 described as “blaming the victim.” People who live in indi- vidualistic societies such as the United States find it easy to blame disadvantaged categories of the population for their own poverty. But do poor people really deserve to live as they do? If disadvan- taged people lack some of the optimism and confidence found among people who are better off, critics suggest, this is more the result of being poor than it is the cause of their low social standing.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING How does structural-functional theo- ry explain the fact that some categories of the population have high- er social standing than others?

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Personal Meaning of Race Forty years after the end of slavery in the United States, the pioneering sociologist W. E. B. Du Bois published The Souls of Black Folk, an analysis of the social standing of African Americans. As Du Bois saw it, even though slavery was gone, most people of color were still living as second-class citizens.

Every time black people and white people met, said Du Bois, race hung in the air, defining each in the eyes of the other. From the African American perspective, race produces a “double-consciousness, [a] sense of always looking at oneself through the eyes of others, of measuring one’s soul by the tape of a world that looks on in amused contempt and pity” (2001:227, orig. 1903). In effect, Du Bois said, U.S. society makes whites the standard by which oth- ers (including African Americans) should be measured. In daily encounters, race operates as a master status, a trait that defines and devalues any person of color.

Today, more than a century later, race continues to shape the everyday lives of everyone, regardless of their color. Manning Marable sums it up this way: “As long as I can remember, the fundamentally defining feature of my life, and the lives of my family, was the stark reality of race” (1995:1).

EVALUATE

Symbolic-interaction theory investigates how we use color (or, in the case of ethnicity, cultural background) in the process of defining our- selves and evaluating other people. In short, race and ethnicity are key building blocks of the reality we construct in everyday life.

At the same time, race involves more than personal understand- ings. Race is also an important structure of society, a dimension of social stratification. This insight brings us to the social-conflict approach.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What did W. E. B. Du Bois mean when he said that African Americans have a “double-consciousness”?

94 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

remains to be done, there is also reason for pride and optimism. Many are dismayed at the racial tone set by the current presi- dent. But the election and reelection of Barack Obama, an African American man, as president of the United States is surely a sign that race is no longer the barrier it once was (West, 2008).

CHECK YOUR LEARNING How did Marx and Engels explain racial and ethnic conflict in capitalist societies such as the United States? What does multicultural theory add to our understanding of racial and ethnic inequality?

The Applying Theory table summarizes the contri- butions of structural-functional theory, social-interaction theory, and social-conflict theory to an understanding of racial and ethnic inequality.

POLITICS, RACE, AND ETHNICITY

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 3.7 Analyze racial and ethnic inequality from various

positions on the political spectrum.

Should racial and ethnic inequality be defined as a prob- lem? If so, what should be done about it? Conservative, lib- eral, and radical-left viewpoints, explored in the following section, produce different answers to these questions.

The Far Right and Conservatives: Culture and Effort Matter There is no doubt that a small but significant share of the population holds far-right views that endorse both nation- alism and white supremacy. The 2017 demonstration in Charlottesville, Virginia, as well as continuing incidents

term “ethnic” to anyone not of English background or even to speak of “whites and blacks,” placing the dominant category first (as some people do, saying “husbands and wives”).

EVALUATE

Recent years have shown us the extent of racial conflict in the United States. Especially since the election of President Trump, the level of hostility toward minorities has increased. In a number of cases, we have witnessed public marches and demonstrations by people on the far right who openly support white supremacy. For this reason, social-conflict theory speaks to us today.

One criticism of social-conflict theory is that this approach downplays what people in the United States have in common. Whatever their color or cultural background, the majority of people identify themselves as “Americans,” and they have joined together over and over again to help each other in bad times and, in good times, to celebrate the principle of individual freedom that defines our way of life.

A second problem is that painting minorities as victims runs the risk of taking away people’s responsibility for their own lives. It is true that minorities face serious barriers, but we need to remember that people also make choices about how to live and can act to raise their social standing and join together to improve their communities.

Third, despite the evidence of rising hostility against minorities over the past several years, conflict theory all but ignores the sig- nificant strides this nation has made over many decades in deal- ing with its social diversity. During the last several generations, U.S. society has moved closer to the ideals of political participation, pub- lic education, and equal standing before the law for everyone. As a result, the share of minorities who are well schooled, politically active, and affluent has steadily increased. In a survey conducted in 2013, fifty years after Martin Luther King Jr.’s “I Have a Dream” speech, 81 percent of U.S. adults (including 71 percent of African Americans, 81 percent of Hispanic Americans, and 86 percent of whites) claimed that, over the past fifty years, this country has made “a lot” or “some” progress toward realizing Dr. King’s dream of racial and ethnic equality (Pew Research Center, 2013). Although much

APPLYING THEORY

Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Structural-Functional Theory Symbolic-Interaction Theory Social-Conflict Theory

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level

What do we learn about racial and ethnic inequality?

Structural-functional theory highlights the importance of culture to social standing. Various categories of the population have differing cultural orientations that affect patterns of education and achievement. The “culture of poverty” thesis developed by Oscar Lewis is one example of a theory to explain why some low-income people have a fatalistic view of their situation.

Symbolic-interaction theory focuses on how people experience society in their everyday lives. Race and ethnicity affect the way we evaluate ourselves and others. W. E. B. Du Bois claimed that most people consider race a basic element of social identity, to the disadvantage of people of color.

Social-conflict theory links race and ethnicity to class—all are ele- ments of social stratification. Marx and Engels claimed that race and ethnicity divided the working class. Multicultural theory claims that our culture has a European bias that pushes minority ways of life to the margins of society.

Are racial and ethnic differences helpful or harmful to society?

Ethnic differences are cultural and a source of identity and pride for most people. At the same time, traditional or fatalistic cultural orientations can be a bar- rier to achievement for some categories of people.

To the extent that race or ethnicity becomes a master status that devalues people, these social structures take away from our com- mon humanity.

As elements of social stratifica- tion, race and ethnicity serve the interests of elites and are harmful to the operation of society.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 95

How would you feel, for example, about the possibility that you had been admitted to college or given a job not just because of your abilities and achievements but also because of your skin color or ethnic background?

Finally, conservatives point out that affirmative action helps the minorities who need it least. Minorities on col- lege campuses and in the corporate world are, by and large, already well off; affirmative action does less for the minority poor, who need help the most (Gilder, 1980; Murray, 1984; Sowell, 1987, 1990; Carter, 1991; Steele, 1990; Stone, 2000).

Liberals: Society and Government Matter Liberals claim that societal factors such as prejudice and discrimination, rather than cultural differences, are the main causes of social inequality among various racial and ethnic categories. For this reason, liberals claim, it is simply not true (as conservatives claim) that everyone has the same chance to get ahead. Prejudice and discrimi- nation are still very much a part of how our society oper- ates, and institutional bias can be found in education, the military, the corporate economy, and the nation’s crim- inal justice system. Liberals point out that there is still overt racism in the United States—in recent years white supremacists have marched in various cities—and the level of hostility toward minorities has increased since the presidential election in 2016, a rising pattern of hate that some have described as the “Trump effect” (Kaleem, 2017; Le Miere, 2017).

of police violence against African Americans makes clear that rac- ism and outright racial hatred are still part of this country’s way of life (Cohen et al., 2017).

That said, the vast majority of conservatives reject such extreme views and support the idea that all people should have equal standing before the law and that everyone should have the chance to improve their lives. Believing that our society, at least generally, does provide these benefits to all segments of the population, con- servatives also believe that peo- ple are responsible for their own social standing.

If some racial and ethnic minorities are more successful than others, it is likely that cul- tural differences are at work. On average, people in vari- ous racial and ethnic categories place different emphasis on schooling, aspire to different kinds of jobs, and even attach different levels of importance to financial success. For instance, Italian Americans have long worked in the building trades, Irish Americans lean toward public ser- vice occupations, Jewish Americans have long dominated the garment industry and are well represented in most professions, and many Korean Americans operate retail businesses (Keister, 2003). Such differences make no one “better” than anyone else. But as conservatives see it, they do produce social inequality.

According to the conservative view, social standing should reflect people’s level of ambition, the importance they place on schooling, and their commitment to hard work. In a society such as ours, people are free, but they are also unequal. Conservatives claim that any society in which government tries to engineer rigid social equality would almost certainly offer little personal freedom.

The defense of individual freedom is the reason con- servatives typically oppose affirmative action policies. They argue that instead of being an effective way to give everyone an equal chance—a path toward the goal of a color-blind society—affirmative action is really a system of “group preferences” or “identity politics.” In practice, as they see it, such policies amount to “reverse discrimi- nation” that favors people based not on their individual qualifications and performance but on their race, ethnicity, or gender. If treating people according to color was wrong in the past, conservatives ask, how can it be right today?

Conservatives add that affirmative action harms minorities by calling into question their accomplishments:

The United States is engaged in a debate over the extent to which the criminal justice system—and especially police—disproportionately targets African Americans. What is the conservative view of this issue? What about the liberal view? Which of these views is closer to your own? Explain.

R ic

hL eg

g/ E

+/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

96 Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

entirely. As they see it, as long as a society continues to recognize race, it will divide people, giving advantages to some at the expense of others.

Could we really leave behind the notion of race, which has been so basic to conventional ways of thinking? In time, perhaps. Doing so would certainly be a radical change because abolishing race will demand basic changes to the current white power structure. As one group of sociologists claims:

A useful place to begin undoing racism is to ad- dress the social, economic, and political embed- dedness of white racism within the foundation of the U.S. political system. . . . Thus, [we] call for a new constitutional convention, one that will represent fairly and equally, for the first time, all major groups of U.S. citizens. (Johnson, Rush, & Feagin, 2000:101)

At this convention, these critics propose, people rep- resenting all categories of the population might consider what all our social institutions would look like if this country set out to achieve the goal of meeting the needs of everyone rather than supporting the privileges of the few.

The Left to Right table provides a summary of the three political perspectives applied to the issue of racial and ethnic inequality.

Going On from Here For most people living in the lower-income nations of the world, everyday life is guided by their kin group, tribe, or traditions. In high-income countries, by contrast, peo- ple break free of the past and are more likely to say that their lives should be guided by personal choices, their talents and efforts, and their dreams for the future. This is why most members of our society think that catego- rizing people on the basis of traits given at birth, such as skin color or cultural heritage, is wrong. That is also why, in our modern society, most people are likely to view tra- ditional, race-based ranking of people as unfair prejudice and discrimination.

Social institutions in the United States have changed over time to reflect more modern and individualistic beliefs. Slavery was abolished (1865); soon after, African Americans gained citizenship (1868), as did Native Americans (1924), Chinese immigrants (1943), and Japanese immigrants (1952).

But as this chapter has explained, racial and ethnic inequality continues today. Minorities still suffer the con- sequences of prejudice and discrimination. These harmful biases exist not only in the attitudes and actions of indi- viduals but also in the operation of society itself. For this reason, the inequality described in this chapter is carried from generation to generation, as too many young Latinos, African Americans, and native people grow up poor.

Liberals acknowledge that there may be cultural dif- ferences between various categories of the population. But liberals see such differences as more the result than the cause of social inequality. That is, people who are shut out of opportunity—whether they are inner-city or rural residents—may develop a sense of hopelessness about their situation. But minorities themselves are not the prob- lem; the responsibility for this situation lies in the structure of power and privilege in the larger society.

If inequality is so deeply rooted in our society, we cannot expect minorities acting as individuals to improve their situation. Therefore, liberals look to government as the solution, supporting policies—including antidiscrimi- nation laws—that reduce racial and ethnic inequality. This is why liberals favor greater spending to assist minorities.

This call for government action also explains why lib- erals support affirmative action. As they see it, an affirma- tive action program is a necessary correction for historical prejudice and discrimination directed against minorities. African Americans today face the legacy of two centuries of slavery and an additional century and a half of racial segregation. In short, for most of its history, the United States has had a policy of majority preference, or white privilege, which is one reason the social standing of whites is higher than that of blacks and other minorities. For this reason, liberals think that minority preference is not only fair but also necessary as a step to help level the playing field.

Liberals see affirmative action as a policy that has had good consequences for this country. Where would minori- ties be today without the affirmative action that began in the 1960s? After all, major employers in government and cor- porate business began hiring large numbers of minorities and women only because of affirmative action, resulting in the growth of the African American middle class (Johnson, Rush, & Feagin, 2000; Kantrowitz & Wingert, 2003).

The Radical Left: Fundamental Changes Are Needed Left radicals claim that much more than liberal reforms such as affirmative action and greater government spend- ing is needed to end the problem of racial and ethnic inequality. Following Marx, radicals point out that as long as a capitalist society defines workers simply as a supply of labor, there is little reason to expect an end to exploita- tion and oppression, which is based on both class and race. Therefore, the radical left makes the claim that the only way to reduce racial and ethnic inequality is to attack the source of all inequality—capitalism itself (Liazos, 1982).

A more recent addition to radical thinking about racial inequality focuses not on economics but on culture. Some of today’s activist scholars conclude that to end racial inequality, a society must eliminate the concept of race

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 97

LEFT TO RIGHT

The Politics of Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Radical-Left View Liberal View Far Right and Conservative Views

What is the problem? Striking inequality and racism are built into the very institutions of U.S. society.

Social and economic inequality places minorities at the margins of U.S. society.

The far right embraces white supremacy, defining minorities themselves as a social problem. Conservatives support equality before the law for a diverse population, but believe that all people make choices and must take responsibility for their own social standing.

What is the solution? There must be fundamental change in economic, political, and other social institutions to eliminate racial hierarchy.

Government programs must attack prej- udice and discrimination and provide assistance to minorities.

Conservatives claim that all people need to treat others as individuals. Some mi- norities must overcome cultural disadvan- tages through individual effort in order to realize higher achievement.

JOIN THE DEBATE 1. Consider the following statement: “Over the course of its history,

the United States has moved closer to the ideal of being a color-blind society.” Do you agree or disagree with this statement? Why? How would conservatives, liberals, and left radicals respond to this statement?

2. What does the 2008 election of Barack Obama, an African American, as this country’s president suggest about the changing importance of race

in our national life? What does the 2016 election of Donald Trump say about our nation?

3. Which of the three political approaches regarding racial and ethnic inequality included here do you find most convincing? Why?

In 1903, W. E. B. Du Bois predicted that race would be the defining problem of the twentieth century. He was right. Could we say the same for the twenty-first century? Generally, conservatives see racial and ethnic inequality as declining over time. But liberals and those on the far left see the country taking steps backward in the last few years.

How much importance will racial and ethnic differ- ences have a century from now? Just as important, what level of acceptance will our society extend to the millions of new immigrants from Mexico, Latin America, and Asia? Perhaps, as some analysts see it, the high level of immi- gration will increase the diversity of U.S. society to a point where race and ethnicity come to mean less and less. It seems likely that the steady increase of multiracial people— including having had a multiracial president—will have the same effect (Lee & Bean, 2010).

The conservative solution to problems of race amounts to focusing on individual achievement—that is, adopting

a set of “color-blind” attitudes that treat people as indi- viduals according to their skills, talents, and performance. Liberals also endorse the long-range “color-blind” goal, but they argue that to reach it, government action (includ- ing programs that take people’s race and ethnicity into account) is needed to guarantee that all categories of people are full participants in society. Radicals on the left weigh in with a greater challenge: Racism is not confined to a small share of our population; it is too deeply entrenched in U.S. institutions to expect well-meaning individuals or even government reform to level the playing field. Therefore, as they see it, institutions must undergo fundamental change to ensure equality for all. All three of these positions stand in opposition to a far-right agenda that seeks to advance the discredited notion of white supremacy.

Throughout its history, U.S. society has debated issues related to racial and ethnic inequality. Let us hope that by the end of this century, we find answers that satisfy all categories of people.

98

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Is increased immigration to the United States a problem?

For many people, the answer to this question depends on whether the immigration is legal or illegal, and for everyone, it reflects political attitudes. What people say we ought to do about the current high level of immigration also depends on their political viewpoint. Look at the accompanying photos, which show two responses to this issue.

Do you see increased immigration as a threat to our way of life or as a source of national strength? If you are more liberal, you might well support legislation that would grant legal status to undocument- ed young people who were brought to the United States as children by their parents. From this point of view, why does immigration strengthen the country?

D av

is B

ar be

r/ P

ho to

ed it,

In c.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 99

What about the idea that everyone should obey the law? If you are more conservative, you might think that the United States should do more to secure its southern border, which currently allows a steady flow of illegal immigrants to enter the country. From a conservative point of view, in what ways does securing the borders strengthen the country?

Hint: Liberals see the United States as the product of immigration. In addition, they view

ethnic and racial diversity as good, and they seek to promote tolerance of different ways

of life. Immigration is also a source of talent as newcomers to the country bring their skills,

work hard, and pay taxes. Conservatives recognize that we’re all immigrants, but they see

increasing numbers of immigrants as bringing too much cultural change—a concern that

leads many conservatives to support making English our nation’s official language. In addition,

conservatives point to the importance of the rule of law and believe that we cannot allow

hundreds of thousands of people to break the law by entering this country illegally. They also

say that only immigrants with legal status should be eligible to receive government benefits such

as education and health care.

1. How do you describe yourself in terms of racial and ethnic identity? Write a short account of how you iden- tify yourself. What importance does racial and ethnic identity have in this country today?

2. An easy and interesting research project is to watch ten or twenty hours of television over the next week or two while taking notes on the race of TV actors and the kinds of characters they play. Although your sample may not be representative of all shows, it will get you thinking about racial stereotypes in the mass media.

3. This chapter describes the steady increase in the rate of interracial marriage in the United States. What pat- terns do you see involving interracial socializing and

dating on your campus or home community? Begin your analysis by keeping in mind the relative presence or absence of people representing various racial and ethnic categories in the campus community.

4. One of the reasons the changing racial and ethnic composition of the U.S. population matters is because minorities typically favor Democratic political can- didates over Republicans. Do some research to find out what share of various minority categories of the population supported Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican Donald Trump in the 2016 presidential election. Based on what you discover, what are the likely long-term political consequences of the coming “minority majority”?

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises

K ev

in G

. H al

l/K R

T/ N

ew sc

om .

100

Making the Grade CHAPTER 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality

Race and Ethnicity

3.1 Explain how race and ethnicity are socially constructed.

• Race is a socially constructed category based on physi- cal traits that members of a society define as important.

• Ethnicity is a shared cultural heritage.

• Both race and ethnicity are important dimensions of inequality in the United States.

The great racial and ethnic diversity of the United States is a product of immigration from other countries.

• The “Great Immigration” (1865–1914) brought 25  million people in search of economic opportunity.

• Nativists, fearing that high immigration would endan- ger this country’s mostly English culture, pressured for a quota system, which Congress enacted in the 1920s.

• Congress ended the quota system in 1965, resulting in another large wave of immigration.

• Today, illegal immigration is a hotly debated topic.

Minorities are categories of people that

• share a distinctive identity (which may be racial or ethnic)

• suffer disadvantages (such as poor schooling and low-paying jobs)

Pluralism is a state in which racial and ethnic categories, though distinct, have equal social standing. In the United States, all people have equal standing by law; however, social tolerance for diversity is limited.

race (p. 71) a socially constructed category of people who share biologically transmitted traits that members of a society define as important ethnicity (p. 72) a shared cultural heritage, which typically involves common ancestors, language, and religion minority (p. 73) any category of people, identified by physical or cultural traits, that a society subjects to disadvantages white privilege (p. 73) the fact that white people, relative to those in minority categories, enjoy social advantages

Patterns of Majority–Minority Interaction

3.2 Describe four major societal patterns of interaction between majority and minority populations.

Genocide is the deliberate killing of a category of people. European colonization of the Americas resulted in the deaths of thousands of native people.

Segregation is the physical and social separation of some category of a population. De jure racial segregation exist- ed in the United States until the 1960s. De facto segregation continues today.

Assimilation is a process (a “melting pot”) by which mi- norities adopt styles of dress, the language, cultural values, and even the religion of the dominant majority.

genocide (p. 75) the systematic killing of one category of people by another segregation (p. 77) the physical and social separation of catego- ries of people assimilation (p. 78) the process by which minorities gradually adopt cultural patterns from the dominant majority population pluralism (p. 79) a state in which people of all racial and ethnic categories have about the same overall social standing

The Social Standing of U.S. Minorities

3.3 Analyze the social standing of major racial and ethnic categories of the U.S. population.

Native Americans suffered greatly at the hands of Europeans over the course of five hundred years. Even today, they have relatively low social standing.

African Americans came to the United States as cargo transported by slave traders. Despite substantial gains, Af- rican Americans are still, on average, disadvantaged.

Asian Americans have lived in the United States for more than a century. Despite average or above-average social standing, they still suffer from prejudice and discrimination.

Hispanic Americans or Latinas and Latinos are a diverse people sharing a cultural heritage. Some categories, such as Puerto Ricans, have low social standing; others, such as Cuban Americans, are better off.

Arab Americans have ancestors in various nations. Like other categories of minorities, they are subject to both prej- udice and discrimination.

Prejudice

3.4 Discuss the causes and consequences of prejudice.

Prejudice consists of rigid prejudgments about some cate- gory of people.

• A stereotype is an exaggerated and unfair description.

• The study of prejudice using the social distance scale shows a trend toward greater tolerance on the part of U.S. college students.

• Racism is the assertion that people of some racial cate- gory are innately superior to people of another. Racism has been used throughout human history to justify the social inferiority of some category of people.

Chapter 3 Racial and Ethnic Inequality 101

• Researchers have linked prejudice to individual traits (authoritarian personality theory) and to social structure (scapegoat theory) and patterns of belief (cultural theory).

• The “culture of poverty” theory developed by Oscar Lew- is claims that minorities develop a fatalistic cultural outlook that leads to a sense of hopelessness and low self-esteem.

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: The Personal Meaning of Race

Symbolic-interaction theory highlights how race often op- erates as a master status in everyday interaction.

• W. E. B. Du Bois claimed that U.S. society makes whites the standard by which others should be measured and in so doing devalues any person of color.

Social-Conflict Analysis: The Structure of Inequality

Social-conflict theory highlights how racial and ethnic in- equality is built into the structure of society.

• Marxist theory argues that elites encourage racial and ethnic divisions in order to weaken the working class.

• More recently, multicultural theory notes ways in which much U.S. culture is biased against minorities.

POLITICS, RACE, AND ETHNICITY

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions

3.7 Analyze racial and ethnic inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

Far Right and Conservatives: Culture and Effort Matter

• A small but significant share of the population holds far-right views that oppose immigration and embrace white supremacy.

• Conservatives endorse equal rights and opportunities for all and point to cultural patterns as a cause of racial and ethnic inequality.

• Conservatives claim individuals should be responsible for their social standing; they oppose government pol- icies that treat categories of people differently.

Liberals: Society and Government Matter • Liberals point to social structure, including institu-

tional prejudice and discrimination, as the cause of ra- cial and ethnic inequality.

• Liberals endorse government reforms to promote equality, including enforcement of antidiscrimination laws and affirmative action.

The Radical Left: Fundamental Changes Needed • Radicals on the left claim that capitalism is the root

cause of racial and ethnic inequality.

• Radicals on the left call for basic change to all U.S. so- cial institutions, including the capitalist economic sys- tem and the political system, so that they operate in the interests of all categories of people.

prejudice (p. 86) any rigid and unfounded generalization about an entire category of people stereotype (p. 86) an exaggerated description applied to every person in some category racism (p. 86) the assertion that people of some racial category are less worthy than or even biologically inferior to others institutional racism (p. 87) racism at work in the operation of social institutions, including the economy, schools, hospitals, the military, and the criminal justice system multiculturalism (p. 89) educational programs designed to recognize cultural diversity in the United States and to promote respect for all cultural traditions Eurocentrism (p. 89) the practice of using European (particularly English) cultural standards to judge everyone

Discrimination

3.5 Distinguish discrimination from prejudice and show how the two concepts operate together.

Discrimination consists of actions that treat various cate- gories of a population differently.

• Example: An employer refuses to consider job applica- tions from people with Arabic-sounding names.

Institutional discrimination is bias built into the operation of the economy, legal system, or other social institution.

• Example: U.S. law prior to 1954 required black and white children to attend separate schools.

Affirmative action policies allow employers and univer- sities to consider race in hiring and admissions decisions.

• Liberals favor affirmative action in order to increase minority representation in settings from which minorities have been excluded in the past, but conser- vatives criticize such policies as reverse discrimination.

discrimination (p. 89) the unequal treatment of various catego- ries of people institutional discrimination (p. 89) discrimination that is built into the operation of social institutions, including the economy, schools, and the legal system microaggression (p. 90) casual actions, gestures, or words that demean people in some minority category affirmative action (p. 90) policies intended to improve the social standing of minorities subject to past prejudice and discrimination

Theories of Racial and Ethnic Inequality

3.6 Apply sociological theory to patterns of racial and ethnic inequality.

Structural-Functional Analysis: The Importance of Culture

Structural-functional theory explains racial and ethnic inequality in terms of cultural values.

102

4.4 Apply sociological theory to the issue of gender inequality.

4.5 Identify the foundations of feminism and distinguish three types of feminism.

4.6 Analyze gender inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

4.1 Define important concepts including gender and gender stratification.

4.2 Analyze the importance of gender in the operation of major social institutions.

4.3 Examine how gender stratification is found in everyday life.

Chapter 4

Gender Inequality

Learning Objectives

Constructing the Problem

La ur

en ce

M ou

to n/

P ho

to A

lto A

ge nc

y R

F C

ol le

ct io

ns /G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Are women and men equal in U.S. society?

Not in terms of income, with women on average earning 81 percent as much as men.

K ris

ta G

re co

/P ea

rs on

E du

ca tio

n

Can a woman be anything she wants to be?

Today’s women have more choices, but many jobs are almost entirely done by people of one sex.

C at

hy Y

eu le

t/ 12

3R F.

Is beauty just about looking good?

Women who are very concerned about beauty give men power over them.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 103

Does gender affect our life chances? What about the odds of being elected to Congress? Go back more than a century, and women’s chances of winning elected office were exactly zero. Not a single woman had ever served in Con- gress, neither in the House nor the Senate. Only in 1917 was the first woman elected to Congress, so that women represented a fraction of 1 percent of na- tional leaders. In 2019, 127 women were serving in Congress, far more to be sure but, as the figure shows, still representing less than 25 percent of the total. Do you think women have a fair share of political power in the United States?

Tracking the Trends W

o m

en a

s a

P er

ce n

ta g

e o

f C

o n

g re

ss

2010 2015 2020 0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

22%

24%

1920 1925 194519401930 1935 1975 1985 2000199019701950 1955 19651960 1980 1995 2005

127 women in Congress (23.7% of the total) in 2019

SOURCE: Center for American Women and Politics (2018).

104 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

presidents—have been men. In the labor force, women earn much less than men. In addition, women deal with unwanted sexual attention in the workplace just as many women face outright violence at home. To understand many of the issues facing women and men today, we begin by looking at the important part that gender plays in the way society operates.

What Is Gender? 4.1 Define important concepts including gender

and gender stratification.

In societies around the world, women and men lead lives that differ in important ways. Sociologists describe these dif- ferences using the concept of gender, the personal traits and life chances that a society links to being female or male. Gender is not the same as sex, the biological distinction between females and males. Sex is determined biologically as an embryo is con- ceived. As Chapter 5 (“Sexuality and Inequality”) explains, specific biological differences are what give women and men the capacity to reproduce. Gender is a societal construction that shapes the entire lives of women and men, affecting the amount of schooling they receive, the kind of work they do, and how much money they earn. All societies define men and women as different types of people, in the process cre-

ating gender inequality. Gender strat- ification is the unequal distribution of wealth, power, and privilege between men and women. Throughout the world, gen- der is an important dimension of social inequality.

Patriarchy Around the world, we find various degrees of patriarchy (literally, “rule by fathers”), a social pattern in which males dominate females. Matriarchy, a social pattern in which females dominate males, is extremely rare. Two centuries ago,

How might we assess a movie’s portrayal of women and men? Alison Bechdel is a cartoonist with an interest in the way popular culture presents various categories of people. In 1985, she drew a cartoon outlining a simple test. A movie can be said to take women seriously if (1) the film has at least two female characters that have names, (2) the women talk to each other, and (3) they discuss something other than men.

Analysts who have applied the Bechdel test conclude that perhaps half of all popular movies during recent decades—from Thor: Ragnarok, Avatar, and The Revenant to American Sniper, to all The Lord of the Rings films—fail this simple test. On the other hand, a number of recent films, in- cluding Wonder Woman, Beauty and the Beast, Star Wars: The Last Jedi, The Hunger Games trilogy, and Black Panther have women in leading roles and clearly do pass the test. But, con- sidering what the Bechdel test asks, is this really a very chal- lenging standard for films to meet? Or, put the other way, must we conclude that many of the most popular films fail to present women as significant human beings? (Cantrell, 2013; Gibson, 2014; Bechdel.com, 2016; Erbland, 2017)

In the world of films, there is a great deal of inequality between women and men. As this chapter explains, gender inequality can be found in almost every aspect of our so- cial life. As the Tracking the Trends figure showed, a large majority of our national leaders—and (as of 2018) all of our

P ic

to ria

l P re

ss L

td /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

Chapter Overview What is gender? How is gender a dimension of social inequality that affects almost every aspect of everyday life? This chapter documents the different social standing of women and men. You will learn how income, housework, violence, and even ideas about beauty all reflect gender stratification. You will carry out theoretical analysis of gender inequality and learn how what people define as problems and solutions in- volving gender reflect their political attitudes.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 105

among the North American Seneca (an American Indian nation), women provided most of the food and also required Seneca men to obtain their permission before engaging in a military campaign or making some other important deci- sion. Today, the Musuo is a very small society in China’s Yunnan province where women control most property, select their sexual partners, and make most decisions about everyday life (Arrighi, 2001; Freedman, 2002).

Global Map 4–1 surveys women’s power relative to that of men around the world. A close look at the map shows that women living in poor countries are more disadvantaged rel- ative to men than those living in high-income nations.

Explanations of Patriarchy Is patriarchy just a mat- ter of men’s greater body size? On average, according to government health data, males are 9 percent taller, 18 percent heavier, and 20 percent stronger than females

ANTARCTICA

30° 30°

30°

0°30° 30°60°90°

120°150°

60° 90° 120° 150°

30°

0° 0°

EUROPE

20°20° 40°

60°

40°

0°

Women’s Social Standing

High

Above average

Average

Below average

Low

No data

Saeeda Jan, age 20, lives in Afghanistan, a low-income nation that limits the rights and opportunities of women.

Area of inset

West Bank

Puerto Rico (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

ICELAND

SPAIN

NORWAY

IRELAND

UNITED KINGDOM

DENMARK

POLANDGERMANY NETH.

BEL.

LUX. AUS.

CZECH REP.

PORTUGAL

SWITZ.

ITALY

FRANCE SLO. CROATIA

BOS. & HERZ.

FINLANDSWEDEN

ROMANIA HUNG.

SERBIA

SLVK.

ESTONIA

LATVIA LITHUANIA

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

BELARUS

ALB.

BULGARIA MAC.

GREECE

MONT. KOS.

RUSSIA

TURKEY

MALTA CYPRUS

MONGOLIA

CUBA

DOM. REP.

GUATEMALA EL SALVADOR

BELIZE

HONDURAS

COSTA RICA PANAMA

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

VENEZUELA NICARAGUA

HAITIJAMAICA

ECUADOR

PARAGUAY

ARGENTINA URUGUAY

PERU

GUYANA

CHILE

BAHAMAS

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA DOMINICA ST. LUCIA

BARBADOSGRENADA

U.S.

U.S.

ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES

ST. KITTS & NEVIS

KAZAKHSTAN

BRAZIL

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

UNITED STATES

CANADA

Hong Kong

Macao Taiwan

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

SOLOMON ISLANDS

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

TIMOR-LESTE

VANUATU

PALAU

KIRIBATI

MARSHALL ISLANDS

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

NAURU

KYRGYZSTAN

CHINA

BHUTAN

TAJIKISTAN

I N D O N E S I A

SRI LANKA

PHILIPPINES

MAURITIUS

LESOTHO SWAZILAND

MOZAMBIQUE

MALDIVES

SEYCHELLES

COMOROS

SAO TOME & PRINCIPE

REP. OF THE CONGO

EQ. GUINEACÔTE D’IVOIRE TOGO

GAMBIA GUINEA-BISSAU

GUINEA SIERRA LEONE

LIBERIA

CAPE VERDE

LIBYAALGERIA

SYRIA

DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

PAKISTAN

MYANMAR (BURMA)

Singapore

OMAN

NEPAL

IRAN

MALAYSIA BRUNEI

CAMBODIA

VIETNAM

INDIA

BANGLADESH LAOS

THAILAND

MADAGASCAR

SOUTH AFRICA

NAMIBIA BOTSWANA

ZIMBABWE

ZAMBIA MALAWI

TANZANIA BURUNDI

KENYA

ANGOLA

GABON

UGANDA CAM.

CENT. AFR. REP. ETHIOPIA

DJIBOUTI SUDANCHAD

KUWAIT

NIGER

BENIN

MALI SENEGAL

BURKINA FASO

NIGERIA GHANA

SAUDI ARABIA

EGYPT U.A.E.

JORDAN

IRAQ

BAHRAIN QATAR

ISRAEL LEBANON

AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA

TUNISIA

RWANDA

ERITREA YEMEN

S. SUDAN

SURINAME

AUSTRALIA

I N D O N E S I A

SOMALIA

MEXICO

MOROCCO

MAURITANIA

Western Sahara (Mor.)

JAPAN SOUTH KOREA

NORTH KOREA

Greenland (Den.)

RUSSIA

GEORGIA

Astrid Brügger, age 19, lives in Norway; like most girls growing up in high-income nations, she enjoys most of the rights and opportunities available to men.

Window on the World Global Map 4–1 Women’s Power in Global Perspective

The social power of women in relation to that of men varies around the world. In general, women are closer to equality with men in high-income nations, and men have more control over women’s lives in low-income nations. In which countries are women and men most equal? The answer: Slovenia, Switzerland, and Germany.

SOURCE: Data from United Nations Development Programme (2015).

(Fryar, Gu, & Ogden, 2012). Yet it is widely noted that women are catching up to men in almost every test of physical performance. Furthermore, to our cave-dwelling ancestors, physical strength may have made all the differ- ence in survival, but muscles have little to do with success in today’s high-technology societies.

Nor does patriarchy reflect differences in brainpower. On the SAT, young men outperform young women in the math test, but women do better than men on the reading and writing tests. All in all, performance differences linked to sex are very small, and scientists find no overall differ- ences in intelligence between men and women of similar age and social background (Tavris & Wade, 2001; Lewin, 2008; College Board, 2017).

Another theory links patriarchy to greater aggressive- ness in males based on their higher levels of sex hormones (Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974; Goldberg, 1993; Popenoe, 1993b;

106 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

Udry, 2000, 2001). Chapter 7 (“Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice”) reports that most murders are the work of young males, who generally have high levels of testosterone. But not everyone agrees with the testosterone theory. Barbara Ehrenreich (1999) counters that the male hormone testoster- one and the female hormone estrogen are found to varying degrees in both sexes, and she points out that scientists have yet to explain the precise connection between these hor- mones and aggressive behavior.

Most sociologists reject the idea that any behavior is hardwired into human biology. On the contrary, we believe that patriarchy and all the behaviors linked to gender are mostly creations of society. In short, whatever biological forces are at work, societies can and do shape the social differences between the sexes.

Prejudice and Discrimination Like race and ethnicity, gender shapes the kinds of people we become. Familiar ste- reotypes cast women as dependent, sensitive, and emotional

while portraying men as independent, rational, and com- petitive. Notice that gender stereotypes divide humanity by constructing femininity and masculinity in opposing terms.

Such stereotypes overlook the fact that most women and men exhibit a mixture of traits, being more “feminine” in some respects and more “masculine” in others. Also, does having the capacity to show emotions make someone less rational? In truth, gender stereotypes do not describe real people very well.

What is quite clear is that our culture assigns more worth to what we call “masculine” than what we call “fem- inine.” For example, would anyone prefer being dependent to being independent? Being passive to being active? Being timid to being brave? Taken together, gender stereotypes amount to a form of institutional prejudice against women.

In a society that devalues what is feminine, it is not surprising that discrimination against women is wide- spread. For centuries, U.S. society defined women as lit- tle more than the property of men. Women had to respect the authority of their fathers and, later, their husbands. To some degree, times have changed: A large majority of U.S. adults now say that they would support a qualified woman for president (Smith et al., 2013). Hillary Clinton, who came close to winning her party’s nomination for president in 2008, became the Democratic Party nominee in 2016 and won the popular vote. Clearly, it is only a mat- ter of time until we can no longer say that all of this coun- try’s presidents have been men.

The Problem of Sexism Similar to racism, discussed in Chapter 3 (“Racial and Ethnic Inequality”), sexism is the belief that one sex is innately superior to the other. Sexism supports patriarchy by claiming that men are “better” than women and therefore should have power over them.

Sexism involves not just individual attitudes but also the operation of social institutions. As the following sec- tions explain, male superiority is built into the operation of the workplace (with men running most companies and women performing most of the clerical support work), our political system (women may be more likely to vote, but most elected leaders are men), and even religious life (although women attend religious services more often, most religious leaders are men).

Gender and Social Institutions 4.2 Analyze the importance of gender in the operation

of major social institutions.

Like class, race, and ethnicity, gender shapes just about every part of our lives. The importance of gender can be seen in the operation of all the social institutions, as the following survey explains. We begin with the family.

In most sports played by both sexes, male athletes attract more fans and earn more money than female athletes. Fifty years ago, women who won championships earned only about one-third as much as men who did the same. The struggle by women players to gain pay equality was led by Billie Jean King, as presented in the recent film Battle of the Sexes. Today, as a result of this effort, major tennis tourna- ments award equal prize money to women’s and men’s champions.

Li fe

st yl

e pi

ct ur

es /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

Patriarchy means that men have power to control the behavior of women. In some societies, this power can be almost absolute. This fifteen-year-old Afghani woman was burned and beaten by her husband’s family after she defied efforts to force her into prostitution.

S ha

h M

ar ai

/A FP

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 107

marriages are unequal partnerships that favor men, why does it seem that women typically express greater eager- ness than men to marry?

Gender and Education By the time they begin school, children have learned a great deal about gender from books. Children’s books— including Babar, The Cat in the Hat, and Peter Rabbit—are full of gender stereotypes, showing girls and women mostly in the home while boys and men do almost every- thing else outside the home. Newer children’s books pres- ent the two sexes in a more balanced way. More broadly, however, childhood education contains many messages about gender, from the presence of mostly women teachers in the lower grades to sex-linked activities both in and out of the classroom (F. Taylor, 2003; Flood, 2011; Abend, 2013).

To get an idea of what could be done to eliminate gen- der bias in children’s schools, we can consider the case of Sweden. The Social Problems in Global Perspective box takes a closer look.

Gender and the Family Do parents value boys more than girls? Traditionally, par- ents in the United States preferred boys to girls, although this bias has weakened in recent decades (Miller, 2018). But in poor countries around the world where patriarchy is still pronounced, a pro-male bias remains strong. In rural areas of India, for example, families benefit from the earnings of a son, but they have to pay a dowry to marry off a daugh- ter. As a result, many pregnant women pay for ultrasound examinations to find out the sex of the fetus, and many who learn they are carrying a female request an abortion. Sometimes families may even kill an unwelcome newborn girl, the practice of female infanticide.

In the United States, gender shapes our experience of marriage. As Jessie Bernard (1982) explained in her classic study of traditional marriage, men’s experience of mar- riage centers on providing economic support for the family and making key decisions. Women experience marriage differently, providing emotional support to husbands and raising children, sometimes to the point that they have little identity of their own. If Bernard was right that most

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Sweden Tries to Take Gender Out of the Classroom Sweden has made remarkable strides in pursuit of gender equality. A gender gap in pay exists with women earning 85 percent of what men earn, but this is smaller than the pay gap (81 percent) found in the United States. Almost half of Swedish legislators are women, making the country a world leader in sharing power between the sexes. Now, after passing a national law setting the goal of removing gender from schools, Sweden is moving into a postgender era by teaching children that they are humans rather than creatures fitting the mold of “girl” or “boy.”

Annika Linder is a U.S. college student spending a year studying in Sweden. She is living and taking classes at a university in Stockholm. Her major is early childhood education, and she hopes that soon she will be teaching in an elementary school back in the United States.

On this particular day, Annika is beginning an assistantship at a local Swedish preschool. She has been in the classroom only for several hours, but already she cannot believe how different the schooling is in a country committed to gender equality. The Swedes speak of gender neutrality, which means that children may be one sex or the other, but sex should have nothing to do with the kinds of people they become. Right away, Annika notices a girl playing in a sandbox, slapping the sand with a plastic shovel. The girl is making a mess, but the teacher says nothing, explaining to Annika that “We don’t want to send the message that she cannot be physical or play with tools.” In fact, Annika notices, the teacher always addresses the class as “children” and never as “boys and girls.” There is no reason to

reinforce gender identity. Similarly, the Swedish words for “he” (han) and “she” (hon) are never used. In their place, children learn to use the pronoun hen, which is gender-neutral.

Looking around the classroom, all the toys, including plastic dinosaurs and Lego blocks, have no evident gender. Even the dolls used to teach children the names of major emotions— facial expressions range from beaming smiles to dour frowns— lack clothing and have no physical traits that would suggest one sex or the other. All children do sports and take dancing classes, and they dress alike. But other changes are not so obvious. For example, school officials review all books in the library to ensure that the children find the same number of female and male characters (Abend, 2013).

The Swedish policy has critics. Some see it as allowing officials to regulate almost all aspects of school life, crushing freedom and generating a mild sameness in everyone. But others see such efforts as necessary if the goal of ending gender inequality is to be taken seriously.

What Do You Think? 1. What appear to be the advantages of Sweden’s gender

policy for schooling? What are this policy’s disadvantages?

2. Sweden’s government includes a minister for gender equal- ity. Do you think the U.S. president’s Cabinet should include a similar post? Explain.

3. On balance, do you support this Swedish policy? Why or why not?

108 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

decades have television shows featured women as central characters. But we still find fewer women than men cast as talented athletes, successful executives, brilliant detec- tives, and skilled surgeons. More often than not, women have supporting roles as wives, assistants, and secretaries. Music videos also come in for criticism: Most performing groups are all men, and when women do appear on stage, they are often there for their sex appeal. In addition, many of today’s song lyrics reinforce men’s power over women.

For decades, male television stars have been paid more than female stars. This pattern continues, although concern about pay equity is beginning to close the gap. On The Big Bang Theory, for example, female star Kaley Cuoco earns the same pay ($1 million per episode) as male stars Jim Parsons and Johnny Galecki. Some other shows are follow- ing suit.

Gender differences remain strong in mass media advertising. In the early years of television, advertisers targeted women during the day because so many women were at-home wives. In fact, because most of the commer- cials advertised laundry and household products, daytime TV dramas became known as “soap operas.” On television and in newspaper and magazine advertising, even today, most ads still use female models to sell products such as clothing, cosmetics, cleaning products, and food to women and male models to pitch products such as automobiles, banking services, travel, and alcoholic beverages to men. Ads have always been more likely to show men in offices or in rugged outdoor scenes and women in the home.

Even now, films also convey definitions of the two sexes in ways that favor men over women. About 30 per- cent of the films released in 2017 fail the Bechdel test, which requires only that there be two named female characters who talk to each other about anything other than a man. Some nations have taken steps to challenge gender bias in films. Sweden, a country that defines gender inequal- ity as a serious problem, rates films according to gender fairness in much the same way that the U.S. film indus- try rates films according to the amount of sex and violence (Erbland, 2017).

Gender bias also exists in advertising. Sometimes the bias is obvious, as when only men are presented or the intended audience is just one sex or the other. But such bias can also be subtle. Look closely at ads and you will see that they often present men as taller than women, and women (but never men) often lie on sofas and beds or sit on the floor like children. In addition, men’s facial expressions are likely to suggest competence and authority, whereas women laugh, pout, or strike childlike poses. Researchers have found that the men featured in advertising focus on the products they are promoting; women, as often as not, pay attention to men (Goffman, 1979; Cortese, 1999).

Another way gender operates within the mass media involves political campaign advertising. An analysis of

What about advanced education? Women have made remarkable gains in schooling, especially at the college level. In fact, in 2016 women earned 61 percent of all asso- ciate’s degrees and 57 percent of all bachelor’s degrees. Even so, gender stereotyping still steers women to major in English, education, health professions, dance, drama, or sociology while pushing men toward physics, econom- ics, mathematics, computer science, and engineering (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).

Women have also made gains in postgraduate edu- cation. In the United States in 2016, women earned 59 percent of all master’s degrees and 53 percent of all doc- torates (including 63 percent of all Ph.D.’s in sociology). Women are now well represented in many graduate fields that used to be almost all male. Back in 1970, for example, hardly any women earned a master’s of business admin- istration (M.B.A.) degree; in 2016, close to 100,000 women did so, accounting for 47 percent of all M.B.A. degrees (U.S. Department of Education, 2017).

But gender still matters. Men slightly outnumber women in some professional fields, receiving 52 percent of medical (M.D.) degrees, 53 percent of law (LL.B. and J.D.) degrees, and 52 percent of dental (D.D.S. and D.M.D.) degrees (U.S. Department of Education, 2015).

Finally, gender stratification can be seen in the oper- ation of higher education. In the case of law schools, for example, not only are most degrees earned by men but also men represent 67 percent of tenured professors and 69 per- cent of law school deans (American Bar Association, 2017).

Gender and College Sports Gender is at work on the playing fields as much as in the classroom. In decades past, extracurricular athletics was a male world, and females were expected to watch and cheer but not to play. In 1972, Congress passed Title IX, the Educational Amendment to the Civil Rights Act, banning sex discrimination in any educational program receiving federal funding. In recent years, colleges and universities have also tried to provide an equal number of sports for both women and men. Even so, men benefit from higher-paid coaches and enjoy larger crowds of spectators. In short, despite the federal policy outlawing gender bias, in few athletic programs is gender equality a reality.

Gender and the Mass Media There are more than 300 million television sets in the United States (about equal to the country’s total population) and, on average, people watch more than four hours of televi- sion each day (TVB, 2012; Nielsen, 2015). Who can doubt the importance of the mass media in shaping how we think and act? What messages about gender do we find on TV?

When television became popular in the 1950s, almost all the starring roles belonged to men. Only in recent

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 109

voices used in campaign ads during the 2012 presidential election found that men’s voices were used in 63 percent of voice-over ads, while women’s voices were used in only 28 percent of such ads (the remainder used voices of both sexes). Researchers argue that the public generally finds men’s voices to be more credible, and there is evidence that political ads with men’s voices are more effective. In addi- tion, they concluded that a man’s or woman’s voice was selected depending on whether the issue being discussed was considered a men’s issue or a women’s issue (Strach et al., 2015; Leatherby, 2016).

Gender and Politics Patriarchy is about power. Because of patriarchy, women have played only a marginal role in the political history of our country. As Table 4–1 shows, the first woman to win elec- tion to the U.S. Congress joined the House of Representatives in 1917, after that body had existed for 128 years. In 1920, the country reached a political milestone with the passage of the Nineteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which per- mitted women to vote in national elections.

Since winning the right to vote, women have contin- ued to move into the U.S. political mainstream. At the local level, thousands of women now serve as mayors of cities and towns and as members of other governing boards across the country. At the beginning of 2018, 25 percent of state legislators were women (up from just 4 percent in 1970), as were six of the fifty state governors (12 percent). National Map 4–1 compares states and regions of the coun- try in terms of women’s power in state government.

In national government, too, women’s power is increas- ing. At the beginning of 2018, 34 percent of senior civil service personnel and 36 percent of federal judges were women. In Congress, a total of 84 of 435 members of the House of Representatives (19 percent) and 22 of 100 sena- tors (22 percent) were women (Newton-Small, 2016; Center for American Women and Politics, 2018). Gains over the past century are striking; at the same time, women are still underrepresented among our judicial and political leaders.

Around the world, the pattern is much the same: Despite gains over time, women hold just 23.3 percent of seats in the world’s 190 parliaments. In only thirty-three countries (about 17 percent of all countries), among them Sweden and Norway, do women make up more than one-third of the members of parliament (Inter-Parliamentary Union, 2017).

Gender and Religion What does religion teach us about gender? When people in a national sample of U.S. adults were asked whether they tend to think of God as “Mother” or “Father,” 7 percent replied they envision God more as “Mother.” Two-thirds— nine times as many—favored “Father,” with the remaining

Table 4–1 Political “Firsts” for U.S. Women 1869 Law allows women to vote in Wyoming Territory.

1872 First woman to run for the presidency (Victoria Woodhull) represents the Equal Rights Party.

1917 First woman elected to the House of Representatives (Jeannette Rankin of Montana).

1924 First women elected state governors (Nellie Taylor Ross of Wyoming and Miriam “Ma” Ferguson of Texas); both followed their husbands into office. First woman to have her name placed in nomination for the vice presidency at the convention of a major political party (Lena Jones Springs, a Democrat).

1931 First woman to serve in the Senate (Hattie Caraway of Arkansas); completed the term of her husband upon his death and won reelection in 1932.

1932 First woman appointed to the presidential Cabinet (Frances Perkins, secretary of labor in the Cabinet of President Franklin D. Roosevelt).

1964 First woman to have her name placed in nomination for the presidency at the convention of a major political party (Margaret Chase Smith, a Republican).

1972 First African American woman to have her name placed in nomination for the presidency at the convention of a major political party (Shirley Chisholm, a Democrat).

1981 First woman appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court (Sandra Day O’Connor).

1984 First woman to be successfully nominated for the vice presidency (Geraldine Ferraro, a Democrat).

1988 First woman chief executive to be elected to a consecutive third term (Madeleine Kunin, governor of Vermont).

1992 A record number of women in the Senate (six) and the House (forty-eight) as well as the first African American woman to win election to U.S. Senate (Carol Moseley-Braun of Illinois), the first state (California) to be served by two women senators (Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein), and the first woman of Puerto Rican descent elected to the House (Nydia Velazquez of New York).

1996 First woman appointed secretary of state (Madeleine Albright).

2000 First former “First Lady” to win elected political office (Hillary Rodham Clinton, senator from New York).

2001 First woman to serve as national security adviser (Condoleezza Rice); first Asian American woman to serve in a presidential Cabinet (Elaine Chao, secretary of labor).

2005 First African American woman appointed secretary of state (Condoleezza Rice).

2007 First woman Speaker of the House (Nancy Pelosi).

2008 For the first time, women make up the majority of a state legislature (New Hampshire).

2013 New Hampshire becomes the first state to have all-women leadership as the governor and all U.S. senators and members of Congress are women.

2014 First woman to head the Federal Reserve Board (Janet Yellen).

2016 Hillary Clinton becomes first presidential nominee of a major political party and wins the popular vote by almost 3 million but loses the Electoral College and, thus, the election.

2019 Record number of women in the Senate (twenty-five) and the House of Representatives (102).

one-fourth imagining God equally in these terms (Smith et al., 2013).

The fact that most of us think of God as male is no sur- prise because societies give power and privilege to men. That’s probably why all the Western religious traditions portray the divine in male terms. The Qur’an (Koran),

110 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

Seeing Ourselves National Map 4–1 Women’s Political Power across the United States

Women represent slightly more than half of U.S. adults. Even so, they hold just 25 percent of seats in the state legislatures across the country. The map provides the state-by-state percentages. Looking at the map, what pattern can you detect? What factors can you think of that might account for this pattern?

SOURCE: Center for American Women and Politics (2018).

Share of State Legislative Seats Held by Women

High: 35.0% and over

Above average: 30.0% to 34.9%

Average: 25.0% to 29.9%

Below average: 20.0% to 24.9%

Low: Below 20.0%

U.S. average: 25.3%

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

TEXAS

LOUISIANA

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C. WEST

VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

UTAH

NEW MEXICO

HAWAII

ALASKA

INDIANA

In general, the western states have a higher percentage of legislators who are women.

In general, southern states have a lower percentage of legislators who are women.

the sacred text of Islam, clearly endorses patriarchy with these words: “Men are the protectors and maintainers of women. . . . Hence good women are devoutly obedient. . . . As for those whose rebelliousness you fear, admonish them, banish them from your bed, and scourge them” (quoted in Kaufman, 1976:163). Paul, perhaps the most influential leader of the early Christian church, also sup- ported the social dominance of men over women:

A man . . . is the image and glory of God; but wom- an is the glory of man. For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. (1 Corinthians 11:7–9)

Wives, be subject to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church. . . . As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands. (Ephesians 5:22–24)

Judaism also has a long history of supporting the social power of men. A daily prayer among Orthodox Jewish men includes the following words:

Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, that I was not born a gentile.

Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, that I was not born a slave.

Blessed art thou, O Lord our God, King of the Universe, that I was not born a woman.

In recent decades, more liberal denominations in the United States, including Episcopalians and Presbyterians, have moved toward greater gender equality. This liberal trend includes not only revising prayers, hymnals, and even the Bible to reduce sexist language but also the ordi- nation of both women and men as priests and ministers. But not all religious organizations share in this spirit of change. Orthodox Judaism, Islam, and Roman Catholicism have retained traditional male leadership. But throughout the religious community, a lively debate surrounds the question of whether patriarchal traditions represent God’s will or merely reflect patterns of the human past.

Gender and the Military Women have been part of the military since the Revolutionary War. During World War II, when the govern- ment officially opened the military to both sexes, women made up just 2 percent of the armed forces. By the Gulf War in 1991, that share had risen to almost 7 percent, and 5 of

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 111

In recent years, the nation has confronted a new prob- lem involving women in the military—sexual assault. No one knows precisely the extent of this problem. Officially, during 2016, there were 6,172 reported cases of sexual assault in the military. This total indicates only those cases in which a woman made an official report. The Department of Defense estimates that about 15,000 women experienced a sexual assault during that year (Cronk, 2017). Some activist organizations suggest that one in three military women will become a victim during her time of service.

Of the toal number of cases reported, only 2,892 (less than half) resulted in some form of disciplinary action,

the 148 soldiers killed in that conflict were women. At the end of 2017, women represented 16.4 percent of all active duty military personnel. As of February 2018, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan claimed the lives of 206 women sol- diers. In these recent conflicts, women represent almost 3 percent of all U.S. military deaths (U.S. Department of Defense, 2018).

In the past, only selected military duties were avail- able to women. In 2013, the Department of Defense announced that women would be permitted to engage in ground- combat operations. This change is important not only as a matter of fairness but also as a path for women to move up in their careers. Why? Simply because, within the military culture, combat experi- ence is widely viewed as necessary to advance to top leadership. In 2015, the U.S. military announced that it was planning to open every military assignment to women (Thompson, 2015).

But there is still resistance to expand- ing the role of women in the military. The traditional explanation for limit- ing women’s opportunities is the claim that women are not as strong as men, although this argument makes much less sense in a high-technology military that depends less and less on muscle power. The real reason people oppose women in the military has to do with gender itself. Many people have difficulty with the idea of women—whom our culture defines as nurturers—being put in a position to kill and be killed.

The dangers women face as members of the military are not limited to armed conflict. Research suggests that as many as one in three women in the U.S. Armed Forces will experience sexual assault during her time of service.

How important is it that women have the opportunity to lead this country as president? In 2016, a majority of white women (but not minority women) voted for Donald Trump. Hillary Clinton did win a majority of women’s votes—54 percent. Why do you think women were almost equally divided in the last presidential election?

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images.

R ic

ha rd

E lli

s/ A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

112 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

Women Men

Pe rc

en t

o f

Po p

u la

ti o

n A

ge 1

6 an

d O

ld er

in t

h e

La b

o r

Fo rc

e

Year

1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2017 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

80.7 79.8 79.7 79.7 74.875.0

83.7

37.7 39.2

46.3 51.5

57.5 58.9 59.9

73.3

59.3

71.2

58.6

43.3

54.5

33.9

69.1 69.1

76.476.377.9 77.4

56.7 57.0

35.7

Diversity Snapshot Figure 4–1 Women and Men in the U.S. Labor Force

Over the past half century, the share of men in the labor force has gone down (with men retiring earlier and living longer), while the share of women working for income has increased dramatically, reaching a peak of about 60 percent in 2000 and declining slightly since then.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor (2018).

and just 1,865 cases (less than one-third) resulted in some type of disciplinary action. These numbers lead critics to question how serious the military is to pursue complaints and to punish offenders (Cronk, 2017; U.S. Department of Defense, 2017).

Gender and Work Many people still think of various jobs as either men’s work or women’s work. A century ago in the United States, however, most people did not think women should work at all, at least not for pay. Back then, as the old saying goes, “a woman’s place is in the home.” In 1900, this statement was mostly true, with just one woman in five working for income. The most recent data, found in Figure 4–1, show this share to be 56.8 percent, reflecting a huge increase since 1900 even allowing for a slight decline since 2000. Three out of four women in today’s labor force work full time. What about men? Historically, the trend has been in the opposite direction. Since 1950, the share of adult men in the labor force has slowly but steadily declined (U.S. Department of Labor, 2018).

What accounts for this dramatic rise in the share of working women? Many factors are involved. At the

beginning of the twentieth century, most people lived in rural areas where few people had electric power. Back then, women typically spent long hours cooking, cleaning, and raising many children. Today’s typical home has a host of appliances, including washers, vacuums, and microwaves, and all this technology has dramatically reduced the time needed for housework so that women and men have more chance to work for income.

In addition, today’s average woman has just two chil- dren, half the number that was typical a century ago. But most of today’s women with children do work for income. In fact, 60 percent of married women with children under age three work for pay, 65 percent with children three to five years old work for pay, as do 73 percent of married women with children six to seventeen years old. From another angle, 52 percent of today’s married couples include two partners working for income (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017; U.S. Department of Labor, 2018).

Even though most women now work for pay, the range of jobs open to them is still limited. Work that our soci- ety has defined as “masculine” involves physical danger (such as firefighting and police work), physical strength and endurance (construction work and driving heavy trucks), and leadership roles (clergy, judges, and business

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 113

executives). Work defined as “feminine” includes support positions (secretarial work or medical assisting) or occu- pations requiring nurturing skills (child care and teaching young children). A number of jobs that are defined as fem- inine are performed almost entirely by women even today, as shown in Table 4–2.

Gender discrimination was outlawed by the federal Equal Pay Act of 1963 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This legislation requires that employers not discriminate between men and women in hiring or when setting pay. But gender inequality is deeply rooted in U.S. society; officials investigate thousands of discrim- ination complaints every year, and few doubt that the real number of cases of discrimination is far higher. The Social  Problems in Focus box takes a look at one well- known case.

Table 4–2 Gender Segregation in the Workplace: Jobs Defined as “Feminine”

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor (2018).

Occupation Percentage of Women

in the Occupation

Speech-language pathologist 98.0%

Preschool or kindergarten teacher 97.7

Dental hygienist 94.9

Child care worker 93.7

Dietitian or nutritionist 94.1

Secretary or administrative assistant 95.0

Hairstylist or cosmetologist 92.6

Dental assistant 95.9

Teacher assistant 88.5

Nurse practitioner 92.2

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN FOCUS

Sex Discrimination in the Workplace: The Hooters Controversy Does a company have the right to hire anyone it wants to? That was the issue in 1991 when the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) decided to sue the Hooters restaurant chain for sex discrimination. Hooters stands apart from other restaurant chains because of its policy of hiring young, attractive women, who wait on tables while dressed in form-fitting, low- cut T-shirts and tight shorts. When men applied to work there, officials of the restaurant—dubbed a “breastaurant” by critics— pointed to this policy and turned them down.

But some of the men turned away thought the policy was unfair, and they joined with the EEOC to sue Hooters for sex discrimination. The suit pointed to Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which bans hiring discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, or national origin. Following the letter of this law, a company cannot just hire only women any more than it could decide to hire only white people. But the law does recognize exceptions to this rule that involve what the law calls a “bona fide occupational qualification.” This means that if a company can show that an applicant’s sex is an important factor in doing the job that is being filled, hiring one category of people over another may be allowed.

It is easy to imagine situations where this exception makes obvious sense. A Jewish congregation looking for a new rabbi, for example, would hire a Jew and would not consider a Catholic or a Hindu. It would also hire a man if the denomination’s religious doctrine permits only men to be ordained. But most cases are not this clear-cut. A department store in a largely white neighborhood cannot hire only white salespeople just because the management might think whites fit in better than people of color.

In a business like Hooters, is sex actually an occupational qualification? Deciding this case required the court to decide

exactly what Hooters was really selling. If we define Hooters as simply a restaurant, its hiring policy would be a clear violation of the law. But Hooters claimed that customers come to its restaurants as much to see the women working as waitresses as they do to get a meal. For that reason, Hooters continued, hiring only women (and hiring only certain women) should be within the law.

When the case was settled in 1997, the court did not agree with the claims Hooters made—at least not entirely—and something of a compromise resulted. Because Hooters had provided employment to only one sex and excluded the other, the court found the restaurant chain guilty of sex discrimination and fined the corporation $3.75 million. But the court also found that the business of Hooters was not just food but “providing vicarious sexual recreation” to customers, which makes an applicant’s sex relevant to the company’s hiring. So the court ended up permitting Hooters to continue to hire attractive women as waitresses, but only if the company would create new categories of jobs—such as hosts and bartenders—that would provide employment opportunities to both men and women (Reiland, 1998; Bernstein, 2001).

What Do You Think? 1. When is a person’s sex relevant to work? Given the current

controversy over sexual harassment in the workplace, is it ever relevant?

2. Do you agree with the law stating that a college cannot legally refuse to hire a man to teach courses in women’s studies or a woman to teach courses in men’s studies? Why or why not?

3. Have you ever been the target of workplace sex discrimina- tion? Explain.

114 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

female–male pay difference. Even so, in every state men earn significantly more than women.

The gender gap in earnings means that women are more likely to be at the low end of the income scale. In 2016, 31 percent of full-time women workers earned less than $30,000, compared with 22 percent of men. The gen- der gap also provides advantages to men: Twice as many men as women (18 percent versus 9 percent) earned more than $100,000 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

The gender earnings gap means that most women who share a household with a man depend on his earnings. For this reason, after separation, divorce, or the partner’s death, a woman’s income may fall dramatically. Especially if she has young children, the loss of a partner’s income may cause financial hardship and raise her risk of falling into poverty.

Three Reasons for the Gender Gap in Pay In the United States, why do men earn so much more than women? The first and biggest reason, noted earlier, is that men and women typically have different types of jobs. In general, what our society considers to be men’s work commands higher pay (and more prestige) than what they see as women’s work.

A second reason is that everyone assigns importance to work in relation to other social roles and obligations. U.S. society assigns women most of the responsibility for raising children. Pregnancy, childbirth, and the task of rais- ing small children effectively limit women’s careers more than men’s. Recent research suggests that, on average, women spend almost twice as much time doing unpaid work in the home as men. Because women devote so much more time to unpaid work in the home—sometimes tak- ing extended periods of time away from paid work to raise young children—men end up with more workplace seniority and career advancement. In addition, some women with young children or aging parents choose jobs, even at lower pay, that do not tie up their evenings and weekends or require them to travel far from home. Still other mothers (but rarely fathers) choose a job because it is nearby, offers a flexible schedule, or provides child care facilities. Family–work conflict is especially likely to come into play when women consider workplace leadership positions—many of which involve a workweek that may extend to sixty hours or more. When asked if they wanted to become a “boss or top manager,” a larger share of young women (34 percent) than young men (22 percent) said “No, thanks” (Slaughter, 2012; Greenstone, 2013; Pew Research Center, 2013; Miller, 2016).

Women’s greater family focus means that, especially during the time when they have young children, women are likely to fall behind men in their careers. Among young people just starting out in the labor force, women earn 90 percent as much as men, but the gap increases as women

Gender Stratification 4.3 Examine how gender stratification is found

in everyday life.

As noted earlier, gender stratification is the unequal distri- bution of wealth, power, and privilege between men and women. Gender inequality is evident in the fact that, when compared with men, women have both less income and greater responsibility for housework. Women also contend with other disadvantages, including high risk of domestic violence and sexual harassment.

Income Income is one important dimension of gender inequality. As you have learned, women and men perform different types of work, with women generally holding clerical and service jobs and men having most executive and profes- sional positions. The predictable result is that women and men receive different levels of pay.

In 2016, the median pay for men working full time was $50,135; women working full time earned $39,923, or 81 percent as much. National Map 4–2 shows that there is considerable variation among the states with regard to the

Mark Wahlberg was paid $1.5 million to reshoot scenes in the film All the Money in the World. Michelle Williams, who was also involved in the reshoot, was paid less than $1,000, or less than one percent as much as her male costar. In an effort to publicize the gender inequal- ity in Hollywood, Wahlberg donated his $1.5 million to support the #MeToo and #TimesUp movements to end sexual harassment.

M ic

ha el

B uc

kn er

/V ar

ie ty

/S hu

tt er

st oc

k.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 115

schooling and hold exactly the same jobs, over time women typically fall behind their male colleagues.

If women spend more time out of the labor force during important career-building years, what happens when they want to return to work? When women attempt to “step back in,” many realize that the challenge is far greater than they expected. The Personal Stories box takes a closer look.

The third reason for gender inequality is that women suffer from gender discrimination. This means that many employers pay women less than men simply because they can get away with it. Employment discrimination is illegal, and equal opportunity laws have reduced the blatant dou- ble standard that was common in the past. But more sub- tle discrimination continues, as in the case of a company in which male employees were invited to an out-of-town meeting while female employees were excluded because the company thought attending such an event might be too dangerous for a woman driving out of town at night alone Benokraitis & Feagin, 1995:85).

The Glass Ceiling Today, when a company is looking to fill a top job, no one is likely to come right out and say, “Let’s promote a man.” But cultural bias against women affects many promotion decisions. Sociologists use the

have children and typically step away from their jobs (Slaughter, 2012; Brown & Patten, 2017).

A similar pattern involves caring for aging parents. Our society defines elder care, like child care, as largely the responsibility of women rather than men. One study, for example, found that almost half of women in competi- tive jobs took time off from work to care for aging parents (Hewlett & Luce, 2005; Hewlett, 2010). Considering care- giving for both children and aging parents, family–career conflict holds back women’s workplace achievement. On the campus, for example, researchers find that young female professors with at least one child are less likely to have tenure than male professors in the same field (Shea, 2002; Ceci & Williams, 2011).

Such patterns help us to understand why a recent sur- vey found that, among people between the ages of eighteen and thirty-two, 59 percent of women but just 19 percent of men agreed with the statement that “being a working parent makes it harder to advance in a job or a career” (Pew Research Center, 2013). In fact, research suggests that, whether or not women ever do have a child, the fact that they might have a child is enough for some employ- ers to slow their career progress (Ali, 2016). Taken together, these studies point to the long-term effects of family-based gender inequality: Even if both sexes start out with the same

Women’s Earnings as a Percent of Men’s 2017

U.S. average: 81.8%

84.0% or more

81.0% to 83.9%

78.0% to 80.9%

Less than 78.0%

Nancy Willis works as a waitress in Laramie, Wyoming, earning less than $20,000 a year.

Karen Sachs works on the staff of a member of Congress, earning more than $70,000 a year.

ALASKA

HAWAII

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

LOUISIANA

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C.WEST VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

ALABAMA

FLORIDA

UTAH

Seeing Ourselves National Map 4–2 The Earnings Gender Gap across the United States

Nationwide, women working full time earn about 81 percent as much as comparable men. In states with strong economies or younger populations (such as Florida and Colorado), the gender gap is smaller; in states with weaker economies and older populations (such as West Virginia and Wyoming), the gender gap is greater. Why do you think age plays a part in this pattern?

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor (2017).

116 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

How much housework do men and women actually do? Figure 4–2 shows that women do almost twice as much housework as men. Looking more closely, we see that women also do about twice the amount of child care as men do. Finally, notice the consequences of women’s greater responsibility for work within the home: Men have significantly more leisure time than women have. These numbers help us to understand why housework is some- times called women’s “second shift” (Hochschild, 2012; Miller, 2016; U.S. Department of Labor, 2016).

The fact that most housework is performed by women goes a long way to explain why such work is unpaid. A number of progressive countries (including Canada and Finland) are considering enacting a law providing a min- imum annual income for all people. In part, this policy would address the problem of poverty, providing income to all people including the sick and those who cannot find a job. But an additional consequence of a universal minimum

term glass ceiling to refer to subtle discrimination that effec- tively blocks the movement of women into the highest positions in organizations. According to Fortune magazine (2017), just twenty-seven of the Fortune 500 companies in the United States have a woman as their chief executive officer.

Housework Just as patriarchy gives men control of the workplace, it also assigns women most of the housework. In Japan, probably the most patriarchal of all high-income nations, women do almost all the shopping, cooking, cleaning, and child care. In the United States, where two incomes are the norm among married couples, women still do most of the house- work (or pay other women to do it). A recent survey asked adults living with partners in a household to identify the person who does the housework: 67 percent of women and just 10 percent of men answered “me” (Smith et al., 2017).

PERSONAL STORIES

After the Children: Getting Back in the Game One major reason that women earn less than men involves society’s expectation that they take on most family obligations. Consider the story of Catherine Strong, a well-educated and talented woman who had a career in banking and then took time off from work to have children (Chaker & Stout, 2004).

Catherine Strong shifted nervously in her chair as the woman be- hind the large desk in front of her read through the papers in her hands. Strong remembered how she used to sit behind a big desk like that during her many years as an investment officer with sev- eral high-profile banks in New York City. She thought about how she used to interview people seeking a promotion or eager to find a new job. That seemed a long time ago. Now it was her turn to be looking for work, and she had enlisted the help of a large search firm.

The search-firm counselor completed the review of her file, looked up, and with a serious expression began to speak. She ex- plained to Strong that she has a good education—a college de- gree from a well-known school and also an M.B.A. degree from a large university. Her résumé showing years of work for several large banks is also very impressive. But, the counselor continued, times are tight with the weak economy, and jobs are much harder to find than they once were. Even more important, she continued, is the fact that Strong has not taken home a paycheck for almost fifteen years. In the very competitive world of high finance, the odds were slim that Strong would find anything even close to the jobs she once had.

Catherine Strong is one of the millions of women who left the workforce to have children and to stay home raising them. At first, she expected to be away from work for perhaps a year. But she discovered that raising a newborn can be quite a challenge, and by the time her firstborn was two, she and her husband learned that they soon would be parents again.

Like most women, Strong does not regret the choices she made. But, also like most women, she does wish that her husband could have done more to share the parenting. She is

quick to point out that once she stopped working, his paycheck was all the family had to live on, and he worked harder than ever. But she always thought that once the kids got into their teenage years, she could go back to the job she had loved. Now that dream seems to be far out of reach.

The recent recession has made job hunting hard for everyone. But women who have been out of the labor force (the polite expression is “having gaps in your résumé”) have the toughest time of all. Their skills may be rusty or even completely out of date. Many women share the dismay experienced by Catherine Strong as they learn how much has changed in their field of work since the time they were last in the office. In addition, most women in this situation also learn that they have lost most of their networks and contacts.

Should companies do more to keep in touch with employees like Strong who leave to raise children? Are there other ways that companies (or society as a whole) should support women who have raised children and wish to return to work? Catherine Strong cringed when she heard her job counselor sum up her chances: “You’re going to have to be realistic. You are not going to find the type of job you left fifteen years ago. You’ll need to take a big step down.” Does our society need to do more?

What Do You Think? 1. Should companies help women like Catherine Strong who

are trying to return to work? How might they help?

2. What about fathers in all of this? Should they do more to share the work of parenting?

3. Have you or anyone you know ever been in Catherine Strong’s position? If so, what happened?

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 117

Which categories of women are at greatest risk of sexual violence? Age is part of the answer: According to government data, women younger than thirty-five are at high risk. Income matters, too, because poor women are at higher risk than affluent women. Finally, women living in cities are at higher risk than women living in suburbs or in rural areas (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Violence is a crime, but what makes it a gender issue? First, physical aggressiveness is part of our cultural defini- tion of masculinity. Put simply, “real men” take control of a situation and do not allow themselves to be pushed around, one reason most violent crimes are committed by males (see Chapter 7, “Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice”). Second, many people treat with contempt whatever a patri- archal society labels as feminine or less worthy. Third, a major cause of sexual violence (especially on the campus) is that men often think they have permission to engage in sex- ual activity with a woman simply because she shows inter- est in them. That is, given our culture’s support for male power, men confuse interest with consent. Sexual acts in the absence of clearly expressed consent is assault (Goetting, 1999; Herman, 2001; Lofgreen et al., 2017).

Gender violence ranges from annoying actions such as men whistling at a woman walking down a city street to unwanted physical contact such as cornering a woman against a wall in a dorm hallway to outright violence such as an angry punch in a suburban home. In all cases, these assaults are not so much sexual—as is commonly thought—as

income law would be providing funds to those who do housework. Supporters of this policy claim that women have long been giving society a free ride with their unpaid labor and it is now time for society to support those who maintain our homes and raise our children (Shulevitz, 2016).

Violence against Women Perhaps the most serious problem linked to patriarchy is men’s physical violence against women. Assault, rape, and even murder are common enough that they must be included in our society’s pattern of men dominating women.

The good news is that the rate of sexual assault fell by half between 1995 and 2005, a period during which crime rates in general declined. The sexual assault rate has remained about the same in the years since 2005. The bad news is that the most recent numbers are still high. The U.S. government estimates that some 1.9 million physical assaults against women take place each year, with an addi- tional 535,000 aggravated (serious) assaults and 272,000 sexual assaults, including rape and attempted rape (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). On campus, the government estimates, during the academic year 4 percent of female college students are victims of rape or attempted rape. Another estimate suggests that, over a four- or five-year college career, about 20 percent of all women on campus experience such a crime (U.S. Department of Justice, 2012).

Diversity Snapshot Figure 4–2 Gender, Housework, and Leisure Time

Whether couples have children or not, women do more housework and have less leisure time than men.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor (2016).

H o

u rs

p er

W ee

k

Men

9. 66

17 .1

5

25 .9

7

27 .4

4

17 .8

5

24 .1

5

9. 94

3. 08

32 .4

1

16 .5

9 6.

16

10 .2

2 42.35

All

Women Men

Youngest HH Child Under 6

Women Men

Youngest HH Child 6–17

Women Men

No Children Under 18

Women 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45 Housework Caring for household children Leisure activities

9. 24

9. 38

27 .5

1

37 .7

3

15 .6

8

5. 81

30 .1

7

10 .7

1

16 .1

118 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

problem. Even so, it was only in 2017 that sexual harass- ment was transformed into a national debate beginning with allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein. These allegations led to tens of thousands more against hundreds of powerful men in film and the other arts, charitable orga- nizations, and Congress. By the beginning of 2018, more than 100 million women had added their voices to a social movement symbolized by #MeToo on Twitter and other social media (Almukhtar, Gold, & Buchanan, 2018).

Why is this social movement important? For one thing, to the extent that men think of women in sexual terms, they ignore women’s achievements and are unlikely to accept women as equals in the workplace, on the campus, or anywhere else. For another, if society does not define sexual harassment as a problem, men in positions of power are free to coerce sex from women they supervise causing widespread fear and harm. Recent surveys show that half of women claim that they have experienced sexual, verbal,

they are displays of male power over women. For this reason, sexual violence is a dimension of gender stratification.

Where are women at highest risk of violence? Looking over the statistics, the most dangerous setting for women turns out not to be the dark alley but the well-lit home, the very place where people are supposed to find peace and support (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

In a number of countries, including the United States, families use violence to control the behavior of women. The Social Problems in Global Perspective box looks at the dramatic case of female genital mutilation and Global Map  4–2 shows where in the world this practice is most and least widespread.

Sexual Harassment Sexual harassment refers to unwanted comments, gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature. Only in the 1980s did U.S. society begin to define sexual harassment as a social

Area of inset

ANTARCTICA

30° 30°

30°

0°30° 30°60°90°

120°150°

60° 90° 120° 150°

30°

0° 0°

EUROPE

20°20° 40°

60°

40°

0°

Female Genital Mutilation

Practice widespread

Common within certain communities Common only within some immigrant communities

Not known to be practiced

Greenland (Den.)

Western Sahara (Mor.)

Macao

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

TaiwanPuerto Rico (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

SOLOMON ISLANDS

VANUATU

PALAU

KIRIBATI

MARSHALL ISLANDS

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

NAURU

CHINA

BRUNEI

CAMBODIA

SRI LANKA

PHILIPPINES

INDIA Hong Kong

Singapore

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

TIMOR-LESTE

MONGOLIA

KYRGYZSTAN

NEPAL BHUTAN

TAJIKISTAN

MALAYSIA

I N D O N E S I A

BANGLADESH

MAURITIUS

MADAGASCAR

SOUTH AFRICA LESOTHO

SWAZILAND

NAMIBIA BOTSWANA

MOZAMBIQUE

ZIMBABWE

MALDIVES

SEYCHELLES

COMOROS

SAO TOME & PRINCIPE

ANGOLA

GABON

REP. OF THE CONGO

EQ. GUINEACÔTE D’IVOIRE TOGO

GAMBIA GUINEA-BISSAU

GUINEA SIERRA LEONE

LIBERIA

CAPE VERDE

SAUDI ARABIA

LIBYA MOROCCO

ALGERIA

ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES

BAHAMAS

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA DOMINICA ST. LUCIA

BARBADOSGRENADA

GUYANA

SURINAME

CHILE

ECUADOR

PARAGUAY

ARGENTINA URUGUAY

PERU

HAITIJAMAICA

NICARAGUA

CUBA

DOM. REP.

GUATEMALA EL SALVADOR

BELIZE

HONDURAS

COSTA RICA PANAMA

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

VENEZUELA

U.S.

U.S.

JORDAN

OMAN

ZAMBIA MALAWI

TANZANIA BURUNDI

NIGER

U.A.E.

IRAQ

QATAR

LEBANON ISRAEL

GEORGIA

JAPAN

NORTH KOREA SOUTH KOREA

PALESTINIAN TERRITORY

SYRIA

AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA

TUNISIA

RWANDA

DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO

ST. KITTS & NEVIS

UNITED STATES

MEXICO

BRAZIL

CANADA RUSSIA

KAZAKHSTAN

IRAN KUWAIT

BAHRAIN

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

PAKISTAN

VIETNAM

LAOS

THAILAND

MYANMAR (BURMA)

ICELAND

SPAIN

NORWAY

IRELAND

UNITED KINGDOM

DENMARK

POLANDGERMANY NETH.

BEL.

LUX. AUS.

CZECH REP.

PORTUGAL

SWITZ.

ITALY

FRANCE SLO. CROATIA

BOS. & HERZ.

FINLANDSWEDEN

ROMANIA HUNG.

SERBIA

SLVK.

ESTONIA

LATVIA LITHUANIA

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

BELARUS

ALB.

BULGARIA MAC.

GREECE

MONT. KOS.

RUSSIA

TURKEY

MALTA CYPRUS

UGANDA CAM.

S. SUDAN

West Bank

KENYA

SOMALIA

CENT. AFR. REP. ETHIOPIA

DJIBOUTI SUDANCHAD

BENIN

MAURITANIA MALI

SENEGAL BURKINA FASO NIGERIA

GHANA

EGYPT

ERITREA YEMEN

Meserak Ramsey, who now lives in California, experienced genital mutilation as a young girl in her native Ethiopia.

Binta Traoré lives in a rural area of Mali where female genital mutilation is a common practice.

Window on the World Global Map 4–2 Female Genital Mutilation in Global Perspective

Female genital mutilation is known to be performed in at least thirty countries around the world. Across Africa, the practice is common and affects a majority of girls in the eastern African nations of Sudan, Ethiopia, and Somalia. In several Asian nations, the practice is limited to a few ethnic minorities. In the United States, Canada, several European nations, and Australia, there are reports of the practice among some immigrants.

SOURCE: Population Reference Bureau (2010), World Health Organization (2015), and United Nations (2017).

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 119

short, patriarchal cultures define sexual attractiveness as women’s only form of power.

In recent years, sociologists have developed a coun- terargument, pointing out that beauty is not simply about looking good; it is about inequality and subordination. The Diversity: Race, Class, & Gender box takes a closer look at what this means for women.

Our society has also debated who should control sexual reproduction. In the past, physicians and legislators, almost all of them men, limited women’s access to birth con- trol technology. As late as the 1960s, state laws controlled even the sale of condoms and other birth control devices. Restricting the availability of birth control is not an issue found only in the distant past. In 2017, the Trump adminis- tration announced that all health insurance plans would no longer be required to include birth control (Laguens, 2017).

Today, however, many people are questioning older patterns: Should women have to consult a doctor to obtain birth control? Should women younger than a certain age have to obtain permission from parents in order to use birth control? Should the government require all health insurance plans (including those of Catholic organizations, which officially oppose birth control) to provide birth con- trol products and services to all women (Steinhauser, 2012)?

Abortion is perhaps an even more controversial prac- tice, dividing the country along political lines. Conservatives see abortion as a moral issue and stress the need to protect unborn children. Liberals— especially feminists—see abor- tion as an issue of power and choice. Restricting access to

or physical harassment on the job. Half of women also claim that they have received unwanted sexual attention (Smith et al., 2015; Chan, 2017; Dann, 2017).

Sexual harassment can be blatant and direct: A pro- fessor pressures a student for sex, threatening a poor grade if she refuses. This is a clear case of quid pro quo sexual harassment (the Latin words mean “one thing in return for another”), which the law defines as a violation of civil rights. But sexual harassment can also involve subtle behavior—sexual teasing or off-color jokes— that someone may not even intend as harassment. Such behavior is still harmful if it has the effect of creating a hostile environment that prevents people from doing their work. In that case, the offender and the offended party may well interpret the behavior in question differently. For example, a man who compliments a co-worker on her appearance may think he is simply making a friendly ges- ture, but she may consider such comments intrusive and unprofessional.

Sexuality, Beauty, and Reproduction A patriarchal culture teaches men to assess women not according to their abilities but on the basis of their sexual attractiveness. Of course, women, too, live within this cul- ture, and they may also learn these lessons. Social norms encourage girls and women to wear figure-flattering cloth- ing and shoes (whether or not they are comfortable or even safe) and to flirt with men and be attentive to them. In

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Female Genital Mutilation: Using Violence to Control Women In a poor home in the East African nation of Ethiopia, a little girl huddles in the corner of a small bed. Only eighteen months old, she is in pain and does not understand why.

Her suffering has been caused by a surgical clitoridectomy— sometimes incorrectly called “female circumcision”—which means the external clitoris is cut away. In its more extreme form, the clitoris is completely removed and the vagina is sewed almost completely shut, to be cut open again only on a woman’s wedding night.

The procedure—sometimes performed by a doctor but usually carried out by a midwife or a tribal practitioner, typically without anesthesia—is common in Ethiopia, Nigeria, Togo, Somalia, Egypt, and three dozen other nations in Africa and the Middle East. Estimates place the number of girls worldwide who have endured a clitoridectomy at between 100 and 200 million. About 3 million girls every year experience what is now widely called “female genital mutilation” (World Health Organization, 2018).

This so-called medical procedure is not about curing any illness or disorder; it is a brutal means to control women. In highly patriarchal societies, men demand that the women they

marry be virgins and that wives remain sexually faithful after that. Without the clitoris, a woman loses some or all of her ability to experience sexual pleasure. This procedure, some people believe, will make her unlikely to become sexually promiscuous or unfaithful and more likely to live by the rules of her society.

Throughout the United States, performing a clitoridectomy is illegal. Even so, thousands of young girls in immigrant families undergo this procedure each year. In fact, some immigrant mothers believe that this procedure is even more necessary once they are living in the United States, where women have far more sexual freedom.

What Do You Think? 1. How is the practice of female genital mutilation used to

control the behavior of women?

2. What steps should be taken, in the United States and else- where, to eliminate this practice?

3. Does female genital mutilation amount to child abuse? Explain your view.

120 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

Whatever women may feel about this matter, it is objec- tively the case that as a category of the population, women do have less income, wealth, and power than men. For this reason, it makes sense to define women as a minority.

Theories of Gender Inequality 4.4 Apply sociological theory to the issue of gender

inequality.

Applying sociology’s theoretical orientations—structural- functional, symbolic-interaction, social-conflict, and inter- section theory—helps us understand gender inequality. As you have seen in earlier chapters, various theories highlight different facts and reach different conclusions.

Structural-Functional Analysis: Gender and Complementarity According to functionalist theory, gender is society’s rec- ognition that women and men differ in some respects. This approach views gender in terms of complementarity. In other words, men and women are seen as different in lim- ited but important ways, with each sex having somewhat different roles and responsibilities. These differences also mean that people of each sex need people of the other sex. More broadly, this mutual interdependence helps unite

abortion puts the decision about whether to continue a pregnancy in the hands of men—fathers, husbands, physi- cians, and legislators—rather than with the women whose bodies and lives will be affected by the decision. In the lib- eral view, access to birth control and safe abortion is essen- tial if women are to have the power to make choices about their lives, including both their families and their ability to work.

Women: A Majority Minority? Chapter 3 (“Racial and Ethnic Inequality”) defined a minority as any distinctive category of people who are socially disadvantaged. Are women a minority? In a patri- archal society, the 51 percent of the population who are women fit the definition of a minority because, as a category, they are physically distinctive and socially disadvantaged.

Researchers have long noted that most women do not think of themselves as a minority (Hacker, 1951; Lengermann & Wallace, 1985). One explanation of this fact is that many women assess their relative privilege based on race, ethnicity, and class position rather than sex. Another reason is that, although women do not have the same power as men, our society has taught women to think that they should defer to men, defining a husband’s career or their children’s happiness as more important than their own. The recent #MeToo and #TimesUp social movements, however, provide clear evidence that millions of women are no longer willing to give their power to men.

DIVERSITY: RACE, CLASS, & GENDER

Beauty: What’s It Really About? Beauty is about good looks—what could be more obvious? But beauty is also about gender and power.

Naomi Wolf (1990) claims that our culture’s ideas about beauty put men in a position of power over women. Women, she says, learn to measure their personal importance in terms of their physical appearance, a practice that discourages other avenues of personal development. Furthermore, the standards by which society encourages women to judge themselves are those created by the multimillion-dollar fashion, cosmetics, and diet industries. These standards (embodied in the many young actresses who walk the red carpet in Los Angeles or 100-pound fashion models on the runways of New York) have little to do with the reality of most women’s bodies or lives.

In addition, a focus on beauty teaches women to try to please men. The pursuit of beauty makes women highly sensitive to how men react to them and encourages them to view other women not as allies but as competitors.

Taken together, our cultural ideas about beauty amount to an effective strategy to maintain patriarchy. Much advertising directed at women on television and in magazines and newspapers is not simply about what women should buy and use. Rather, it is about what women should be. This cultural “beauty myth,” Wolf charges, is a form of gender bias that is harmful to women.

What Do You Think? 1. The Duchess of Windsor once said, “A woman cannot be

too rich or too thin.” Does this advice apply in the same way to men? Why or why not?

2. Chapter 9 (“Physical and Mental Health”) explains that al- most all people suffering from eating disorders are women. Why do you think this is the case?

3. What about race? To what extent are women of color held to the standard of beauty set by white women?

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 121

older, boys and girls also learn that failure to display the right gender patterns may result in loss of sexual appeal. In short, society teaches men to favor women who display feminine qualities as it teaches women to favor men who are masculine. The end result is that men and women bring dif- ferent elements to a relationship thereby integrating society.

EVALUATE

The structural-functional theory of gender was quite influential fifty years ago but is far less so today. Why? Because the argument that “gender differences help society to operate” strikes researchers today as supporting traditional gender roles. Many of today’s sociol- ogists interpret what Parsons called “complementary roles” as little more than male domination.

A second problem with this approach is that, by argu- ing that society benefits from conventional ideas about gender, structural-functional theory ignores the fact that men and women can and do relate to one another in a variety of ways that do not fit any norm. Is it reasonable—or desirable—to want everyone to fit into either the instrumental or expressive category? Today, for example, most people—including both men and women—have instrumental roles in the labor force and expressive roles within their relationships.

A third problem cited by critics is that functional thinking glosses over personal strains and social conflicts produced by rigid gender patterns. They argue that in everyday life, we may experi- ence gender as both helpful and harmful. Such strain is especially great among people who, for whatever reason, do not conform to traditional gender norms. How people actually experience gender in their lives brings us to symbolic-interaction theory.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Explain how Parsons explains gender in terms of complementarity. How does this pattern help society to operate?

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Gender in Everyday Life Symbolic-interaction theory provides a micro-level analy- sis of gender, which highlights how individuals experience gender in their everyday lives.

Gender and Personal Behavior How do people experience gender in everyday life? As we have seen, gender involves differences in power. The more power people have the more choices they have about how to behave. In general, then, our society gives men greater freedom in personal behavior. For example, would you react the same way to a man who uses foul language as you would to a woman who speaks the same way? Similarly, researchers have documented that, in every- day conversation, men have a tendency to interrupt others, especially women; women, by contrast, are more likely to listen politely, especially to men (Smith-Lovin & Brody, 1989; Henley, Hamilton, & Thorne, 1992; Johnson, 1994).

The same gender pattern is evident in facial expression. In addition to symbolizing pleasure, smiling expresses

individuals into families and links families into larger com- munities. In short, gender helps tie together all of society.

Talcott Parsons: A Theory of Complementary Roles The best-known functional theory of gender was developed by Talcott Parsons (1942, 1951, 1954). To understand his ideas, it is helpful to begin with an historical look at human societies.

Among early hunters and gatherers, biological differ- ences between the sexes had critical importance. Our distant ancestors had no way to control reproduction, so women experienced frequent pregnancies and spent much of their adult lives caring for children. As a result, women in these societies had little choice but to build their lives around the home, gathering vegetation as they raised the young. Men’s greater size and strength placed them in charge of hunting and warfare, tasks that took them away from the home. Over many generations, this sex-based division of labor became institutionalized, meaning it became built into a culture that was passed from generation to generation.

By the time of the Industrial Revolution, however, a gender-based division of labor was becoming less neces- sary. For one thing, societies had devised effective means of birth control. As Chapter 5 (“Sexuality and Inequality”) explains, the rubber condom, invented about 1850, pro- vided a fairly reliable method of contraception. Machinery and other industrial technology also reduced the impor- tance of physical strength to economic production, open- ing more jobs to women.

Parsons observed the trend by which gender differ- ences become smaller over the course of human history and concluded that the biological facts of sex, including physical size and strength, have less and less significance for the type of work people do. Yet, Parsons suggested, modern societies still encourage some gender differences because they serve to integrate people and help them work together. Specifically, society defines the two sexes in com- plementary ways, which ensures that men and women need each other and benefit from joining together in the form of couples and families. In the traditional family, women still bear the children, of course, and they take primary respon- sibility for the household. By contrast, men are responsi- ble for linking the family to the larger world through their greater participation in the labor force.

To perpetuate this gender-based specialization, soci- ety guides parents to raise their boys and girls differently. Masculinity, explains Parsons, involves an instrumental ori- entation, emphasizing rationality, competition, and a focus on goals. Femininity involves an opposing expressive ori- entation: emotional responsiveness, cooperation, and con- cern for other people and relationships.

Young people soon learn that looking or acting too dif- ferently from society’s standards of masculinity or feminin- ity can bring sharp disapproval from others. As they grow

122 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Point to ways in which gender guides patterns of everyday interaction, including the ranges of choices available to people, use of space, and use of language.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Gender and Inequality Social-conflict theory switches the focus from functional- ism’s horizontal imagery of gender differences as comple- mentary to a more vertical view of gender as a dimension of social inequality. Rather than uniting society, social- conflict theory argues, gender divides humanity, generating con- flict between male haves and female have-nots.

Friedrich Engels: The Rise of Patriarchy Friedrich Engels (1820–1895), Karl Marx’s lifelong friend and collaborator, extended Marx’s thinking about class conflict to include gender (Engels, 1902, orig. 1884). Engels argued that the same historical process that brings about a ruling class in which an elite dominates workers places men in a domi- nant position over women.

Early hunting and gathering societies assigned women and men different daily routines, but both sexes made vital contributions to daily life. That is, men may have done the hunting, but women collected the vegetation that provided most of the food. Therefore, just as these technologically simple societies lack distinct classes, they come close to gender equality.

Gaining the ability to raise animals and crops provided societies with a surplus—more than people needed just to survive. Typically, some families gained most of this sur- plus for themselves, and this concentration of wealth gave birth to social classes. Once some people had more than others, elites defended their resources using the concept of private property. This same process of emerging hierar- chy also led men to begin controlling the lives of women. Why? Because men who wish to pass on their wealth to their sons must not only be confident in their ownership of property, they must also be certain who their offspring are. Therefore, wealthy men devised the family as a way to control both property and the sexuality of women, who were to remain faithful and raise a man’s children.

With the rise of capitalism, Engels continued, patriarchy became stronger than ever, taking the form of a male- dominated capitalist class. In short, men enjoy most wealth and power. In addition, to ensure an ever-expanding mar- ket for capitalist production, society teaches women that personal happiness lies in marriage and a domestic life as a consumer of products and services. Finally, because capital- ism forced most men to work long hours in factories, men expected their wives to do all the housework. To Engels, the double problem of capitalism lies in exploiting men in factories for low pay and exploiting women in the home for no pay at all (Barry, 1983; Jagger, 1983; Vogel, 1983).

respect and a desire to make peace. Not surprisingly, then, researchers note that women tend to smile more than men (Henley, Hamilton, & Thorne, 1992).

Gender and the Use of Space Typically, people with more power also use more space in their everyday activ- ities. In the classroom, for example, the professor can pace around the room while speaking, but students are expected to stay in their seats. Because men have greater social power, they typically use more space than women, whether the men are speaking in front of a group at work or relaxing on the sidelines at a sporting event. We learn to judge masculinity by how much space a man uses (the standard of “turf” by which “more is better”), and we learn to judge femininity by how little space a woman uses (the standard of “daintiness” by which “small is beautiful”).

In addition, men’s greater power gives them the option of moving closer to others, even to the point of entering what we consider people’s personal space. Women have to be more careful in this regard because moving closer to a man is likely to be treated as a sexual come-on (Henley, Hamilton, & Thorne, 1992).

Gender and Language Finally, gender is at work in the language we use. When talking about proud possessions, many men use female pronouns, as when a young man shows off his new car, saying, “Isn’t she a beauty?” Using a male pronoun in this case (“Isn’t he a beauty?”) seems awkward; this pattern reflects the fact that in a patriarchal culture, men control women, not the other way around.

People’s names show the same pattern. Among opposite-sex newlyweds, the conventional practice is for the woman to take her husband’s last name. The opposite pattern—a man taking his wife’s last name—is extremely rare. Although few people today would claim that this pattern means that the man actually owns the woman, it does suggest that men expect to have control over their wives.

Finally, notice how the English language tends to give what is masculine more value than what is feminine. Traditional titles associated with men—such as king and lord—have positive meanings, but comparable titles asso- ciated with women—such as queen, madam, and dame—are often negative.

EVALUATE

The strength of symbolic-interaction theory lies in putting a human face on gender, showing how gender is at work in familiar dimen- sions of everyday life. This approach also shows that gender is an important building block of social reality.

At the same time, a limitation of this theory (and of all other micro-theories) is that it overlooks the broad importance of gender as a structure that operates throughout society. We now turn to social-conflict theory to examine broad issues of gender inequality and gender conflict.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 123

is easy to see that dimensions of inequality combine so that specific categories of the U.S. population experience particular disadvantage.

At the same time, as Karl Marx might have said, knowing about a problem is all well and good. The point, however, is to change society to reduce inequality. This desire for change brings us to feminism, a study of gender with the purpose of bringing about change.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What is intersection theory? How does it help us to understand the effect of various dimensions of social inequality?

The Applying Theory table summarizes what each theoret- ical approach teaches us about gender.

Feminism 4.5 Identify the foundations of feminism and

distinguish three types of feminism.

Since the 1960s, feminism has gained great impor- tance in sociology. Formally defined, feminism is a political  movement that seeks the social equality of women and men. Feminism therefore involves both theory and activism.

The history of feminism in the United States goes back more than 150 years. The movement’s first wave began in the 1840s as a spinoff of efforts to abolish slavery. Back then, Lucretia Mott (1793–1880) and Elizabeth  Cady Stanton (1815–1902) saw parallels between whites oppressing people of color and men oppressing women. The Defining Moment feature takes a closer look.

EVALUATE

Social-conflict theory shows how gender developed into a major dimension of social stratification. Engels’s work also highlights the close link between gender and class.

But Engels’s theory has its critics. First, families may be patri- archal, but they perform the vital task of raising children. Second, the lives of men and women may be different, but not everyone defines these differences as unjust. In other words, say critics, social- conflict theory is likely to minimize the extent to which women and men live together cooperatively and, often enough, quite happily. Third, some challenge Engels’s assertion that capi- talism is at the heart of gender stratification. After all, patriarchy is also strong in socialist nations, including Cuba and the People’s Republic of China.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING According to Friedrich Engels, how does patriarchy arise along with class differences as a system that allows wealthy men to pass property to their sons?

Intersection Theory: The Case of Minority Women In recent decades, social-conflict theory has linked gen- der inequality to inequality based on race and ethnicity. Intersection theory is analysis of how race, class, and gender interact, often creating multiple disadvantages for some catego- ries of people.

If women are disadvantaged and, as Chapter 3 (“Racial and Ethnic Inequality”) explained, racial and ethnic minorities are also disadvantaged, what about minority women? Are they doubly disadvantaged? Intersection theory claims that the answer is yes (Collins, 2015).

To see how, compare average income for various cate- gories of the U.S. population. In 2016, the median income for non-Hispanic white women working full time was $42,193. But African American women earned $34,953, or 83 percent as much, and Hispanic women earned $29,924, or 71 percent as much. Among women, then, race and eth- nicity are one source of disadvantage.

Then there is the second disadvantage based on gen- der. Within racial and ethnic categories, we see that in 2016, African American women earned 90 percent as much as African American men, just as Hispanic women earned 90 percent as much as Hispanic men.

Combining these two dimensions of inequality, African American women earned 63 percent as much as non-Hispanic white men and Hispanic women earned 54 percent as much as white men (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). Therefore, the intersection of gender with race and ethnic- ity does result in even greater disadvantages for some cate- gories of the U.S. population.

EVALUATE

Intersection theory is an important new social-conflict theory that warrants discussion on its own. By using income data, it

In low-income nations, boys have more economic value than girls because they can earn more money. Therefore, many poor families engage in sex-selective abortion to avoid giving birth to a daughter. In villages in India, clinics provide sonograms that usually reveal the sex of a fetus; they also provide abortions to women who choose to “try again” in the hopes of having a son.

E gg

Im ag

es /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

124 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

APPLYING THEORY

Gender Inequality

Structural-Functional Theory

Symbolic-Interaction Theory

Social-Conflict Theory

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level

What is gender? As explained by Parsons, gender involves complementary patterns of thought and action on the part of women and men that help tie society together.

Gender is a system of meaning that shapes the everyday lives of women and men; how we interact with others, how we make use of space, and even our language all reflect gender.

Gender is a dimension of social stratification that benefits men at the expense of women. Engels explained that patriarchy arose to enable wealthy men to pass property on to their sons and to help all men work outside the home.

Is gender a problem?

Gender is not a problem; it is functional because it is helpful to the orderly operation of society.

From an individual point of view, gender may or may not be a problem; gender is a basic element of the social reality we experience every day.

Gender is a problem, especially for the half of the population that are women because they are disadvantaged by a system that gives wealth and power to men. As intersection theory explains, some categories of women experience especially great disadvantages.

Feminist Foundations There is more than one version of feminism. But almost all feminists agree on the following six general points:

1. The importance of gender. The lives of everyone, feminists claim, are shaped by gender. Men don’t just choose to be competitive any more than women decide to be deferential; this kind of behavior has much to do with how our society defines masculine and feminine behavior.

2. The importance of equality. Feminists oppose the sta- tus quo in which U.S. society gives men both power and privilege. Therefore, feminism is an effort both to understand and to change the social world.

Feminists claim that everyone—women and men—would benefit from greater gender equality. Obviously, patriarchy limits the development and opportunities of women, who make up half the pop- ulation. But men also suffer from a system that drives them to seek control of others, a pattern that results in high risk of death from suicide, violence, accidents, heart attacks, and other diseases related to stress. To a large degree, what psychologists call the Type A per- sonality marked by impatience, driving ambition, and competitiveness—all of which increase the risk of heart disease—is the same behavior our culture defines as masculine (Ehrenreich, 1983).

3. The importance of choice. Feminists see gender as a societal creation that imposes a narrow set of op- portunities on both women and men. Only by aban- doning conventional ideas about the kinds of lives women and men ought to lead will all people be free to decide for themselves the direction of their own lives.

4. The importance of sexual freedom. Feminists claim that women have the right to control their sexuality and reproduction. Feminists support the wide avail- ability of birth control information and technology and oppose legal restrictions on abortion. Many fem- inists also support the gay rights movement. As some feminists see it, lesbians, even more than gay men, are targets of prejudice and discrimination because they violate both the norm of heterosexuality and the expectation that men should control the sexuality of women (Hadley, 1996; Jackson & Scott, 1996; Herman, 2001; Armstrong, 2002).

5. Activism against patriarchy. Feminism actively op- poses all forms of sexism and gender inequality. One important step in this process, as feminists see it, is for U.S. society to affirm the equal standing of women and men before the law. This is why, since its intro- duction in Congress in 1923, feminists have supported passage of the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) to the U.S. Constitution. The ERA simply states, “Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State on account of sex.”

6. Activism against gender violence. As noted earlier in this chapter, many sociologists see violence against women as a pressing social problem. Feminists claim that violence against women in the form of rape, sexual harassment, and domestic abuse can end only when society places women and men on the same level.

Types of Feminism All feminists agree on the general goals just noted, but they favor various paths to achieving them. Generally speak- ing, there are three feminist solutions to the problem of

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 125

will always elevate some people above others. The liberal feminist position is that society should place no barriers in people’s way simply because they are women or men. In short, all people should have opportunity based on their talent and effort and should be treated as individuals.

Socialist Feminism Further to the political left, other feminists doubt that reforming existing social institutions is enough to end patriarchy. Supporters of socialist femi- nism claim that Marxist class revolution is needed to secure equality not just for women but for all people. Recall from our earlier discussion that Friedrich Engels pointed to the roots of patriarchy in capitalist private property. That is, capitalism oppresses women by forcing them to do house- work (which Engels called “domestic slavery”) and to hold low-wage jobs. Without the ability to earn enough to support themselves, women are dependent on men for economic security.

From a socialist perspective, abolishing the capitalist class system means transforming economic production

patriarchy: liberal feminism, socialist feminism, and rad- ical feminism (Jagger, 1983; Phillips, 1987; Lindsay, 1994; Armstrong, 2002; Freedman, 2002).

Liberal Feminism Liberal feminism seeks a society in which all people are treated as individuals so that both women and men can freely develop their talents and pur- sue their interests. Liberal feminism is a reform approach, meaning that it seeks change within existing social institu- tions. The goal of liberal feminism is for women to enjoy the same rights, opportunities, and rewards as men.

Passage of the Equal Rights Amendment is one objec- tive. In addition, liberal feminists support laws to combat prejudice and discrimination against women. They also endorse policies such as providing birth control services as part of all health care, maternity leave for women workers, and child care facilities in the workplace so that women caring for young children can still hold a job.

Liberal feminists do not expect that all women will have the same social standing. Individual talent and effort

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment

Elizabeth Cady Stanton: Claiming Women’s Right to Equality It may be hard to imagine, but just a few generations ago, women in the United States were legally second-class citizens. Women could not vote and could not own property or enter into legal contracts. It was rare for women to earn an income, and the few women who did typically turned the money over to their husbands or fathers.

Many people who joined together to oppose the enslavement of African Americans by white people soon began to wonder if women were the slaves of men. Elizabeth Cady Stanton understood the second-class standing of women and decided to do something about it. In 1848, Stanton and her friend Lucretia Mott began the process of change by organizing a meeting in Seneca Falls, New York.

Some 300 women gathered at Wesleyan Chapel in the small town in upstate New York to hear more about women’s rights. Stanton led the meeting, asking why women did not have the same rights and opportunities as men, including the right to vote. Even many of those who thought women deserved something more were shocked by the suggestion that women’s political voice should be equal to men’s. Stanton’s husband, Henry, muttering that, this time, his wife had gone too far, rode out of town in protest.

Stanton lived for another half century after her historic meeting without seeing her dream of women’s equality come true. But she helped start a social movement that did make a difference. In 1920—eighteen years after Stanton’s death— women did finally gain the right to vote. Of course, even after this victory, many people realized that much work remained to be done. After all, the sexes remained unequal in so many other ways. As a result, a second wave of the feminist movement continues to this day, addressing issues such as equality in the workplace, domestic violence, and reproductive rights.

Here we see the beginnings of the feminist movement in the United States: Elizabeth Cady Stanton speaks to people who traveled great distances to attend the first women’s rights con- vention in Seneca Falls, New York, in June 1848.

M at

th ew

F re

y/ P

riv at

e C

ol le

ct io

n/ W

oo d

R on

sa vi

lle H

ar lin

, I nc

. U S

A /

B rid

ge m

an Im

ag es

.

126 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

radical feminists explain, there was no hope at all because societies had little control over reproduction. But that is no longer the case. With today’s scientific technology, we have far more control over reproduction, so that people are able to reproduce outside of the conventional pattern of heterosexual parenting. For example, in vitro (“in glass”) fertilization—surgically extracting a woman’s ovum, fer- tilizing it manually in a glass dish, and then reinserting it into her body—has been a reality for decades, and the thousands of normal, healthy children produced in this way demonstrate that neither heterosexuality nor the tra- ditional family is necessary to reproduce the human spe- cies (a more complete discussion of new reproductive technologies is found in Chapter 13, “Family Life”).

The future imagined by radical feminism is more rev- olutionary than that imagined by socialists. Here we con- sider abolishing not only the traditional family but also all differences between women and men and perhaps even ending heterosexual relationships entirely.

Could this ever happen? If it did, social institutions would be very different from those we know today. The economy and political systems would have to evolve toward social equality. Families would take a new form, with collective responsibility for raising children. Some observers have suggested that, in order to limit the extent to which the lives of adults are defined by the task of parenting, children must gain greater rights and responsi- bilities for themselves (Jagger, 1983). Others, who see het- erosexuality as part of the problem, claim that equality for women and men would require new thinking about sex- uality itself. Andrea Dworkin (1987), for example, argued that an equal society would be one that gave up all sexual

from the private property of a small elite to a collective enterprise representing the interests of all. This process also means replacing the private household with collec- tive living arrangements in which people come together to share tasks such as cooking and child care. If work were shared in this way, not only would there be no classes, but also men would no longer dominate women.

In short, socialist feminism sees class revolution as necessary for gender revolution. So, while liberal feminism accepts the basic institutions of U.S. society, socialist femi- nism does not. From this point of view, women’s liberation can be achieved only through elimination of the broader economic conditions that have historically oppressed all humanity.

Radical Feminism A third strategy on the political left calls for the most basic change of all. Radical feminism argues that patriarchy is built into the concept of gender itself, and so nothing short of ending the distinction between female and male will bring about equality.

Why? Radical feminists begin with what may seem to be a surprising assertion: The roots of gender are the biological differences that allow women to bear children. In other words, the main reason that women have always been unequal to men is motherhood. From this point of view, the family is not so much an economic relationship (as Engels and socialist feminists claim) as it is a form of insti- tutionalized heterosexuality that limits women’s lives by demanding that they bear and raise children, which places women in the home.

But if the problem of patriarchy is rooted in human biology, what hope is there for change? Until recently,

In Saudi Arabia, only recently have laws permitted women to operate motor vehicles. What does women’s use of the traditional burka suggest about their social standing? Can you point to other ways in which Saudi women are restrained? What about women in the United States?

Str/Epa/Shutterstock.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 127

Like any successful social movement, feminism is controver- sial. Some critics claim that feminists focus too much attention on ways in which women remain unequal to men, ignoring the enor- mous progress women have made and the many opportunities they now enjoy (Sommers, 2003). Certainly, some men oppose feminism because this movement wants to take away male power and priv- ilege. But there are also men—and women, too—who reject the idea that all differences between the sexes are unjust and oppres- sive. Some critics claim that differences between men and women, whether biological or cultural, provide useful ways to organize social life (this was the view, noted earlier, of Talcott Parsons). Others suggest that even though women can earn income, their choice to remain at home makes a crucial contribution to the well-being of their children. Still others argue that feminism has wrongly sought to deny any differences between women and men; by contrast, we need to recognize the special strengths of women and build on them (Popenoe, 1993a; Ehrenreich, 1999; Slaughter, 2012).

Feminism is currently experiencing a renewal in the United States. In part, this rising energy and purpose are a response to the election of Donald Trump, who is widely viewed as no friend of feminism. On the first day after Trump’s inauguration, more than 1 million women marched in Washington, D.C., and in hundreds of other cities across the United States and around the world, as an act of resistance and a show of determination to not lose many of the hard-won gains women have made in recent decades. In 2018, the marches were repeated with an eye toward increasing voter registration ahead of the fall midterm elections.

The current movement also represents the breaking of silence about sexual harassment, which has been expressed in the #MeToo and #TimesUp campaigns on social media. Although many of the women who launched these movements are well known, they

speak for millions more who perform lower-paying work and are at even higher risk for harassment and assault (Gilbert, 2017; Keneally, 2017; Langone, 2018). The

next chapter (“Sexuality and Inequality”) extends the discussion of sexual harassment.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What asser- tions serve as the foundations of feminism? How does liberal feminism differ from so-

cialist feminism and radical feminism? What contributions are made by multicultural fem-

inism and global feminism?

norms, including those that currently discourage mastur- bation, homosexuality, and sex outside marriage.

In the end, we can only imagine what a gender-free society would be like. But for many feminists, that is exactly the point. Whether or not one agrees with this view, radical feminism helps us see how deeply gender is woven into all aspects of our everyday lives. With greater under- standing comes greater choice.

Multicultural and Global Feminism In recent years, feminism has developed further to take account of the diversity of women around the world. Multicultural and global feminism asks that we recognize the common sub- ordination of all women but also acknowledge the social differences among women within U.S. society and also the cultural differences among women throughout the world (Collins, 2000; hooks, 2000; Tong, 2009).

Multicultural feminism is informed by insights gained from intersection theory, described earlier in this chapter. Women share the common experience of oppres- sion in relation to men, but women also have various racial and ethnic identities, just as they have differing class positions. It is important for feminism to recognize that social stratification involves various combinations of gender, race, ethnicity, and class that interact with one another.

Global feminism adds still another dimension of difference: Women live throughout the world in nations sep- arated by a system of global strat- ification. Women living within the United States, for example, experi- ence subordination to men but also enjoy the privileges provided by liv- ing in a high-income nation. The life chances and everyday experiences of women living in low-income nations of the world, by contrast, are shaped by both gender inequality and a dis- advantaged position in the global economic system.

EVALUATE

Because feminism has become a power- ful social movement throughout the United States, it is a major force in sociology. The con- tributions of feminism lie in showing how gender affects almost every aspect of our lives and also in bringing about change toward greater equality of women and men. The more recent development of multicultural feminism and global feminism also helps us appreciate not only the experiences common to all women but also the extensive diversity of women in the United States and around the world.

Feminism has always had an uneasy relation- ship to motherhood because, historically, bear- ing and raising children has been a barrier to

social equality for women. Liberal feminists claim women should have children by choice. For socialist

feminists, women may bear children by choice, but societies should provide for collective child care. Radical feminists seek even greater change, exploring ways that technology can be used to replace conven- tional reproduction in the process of eliminating the concept of gender.Tetiana Mandziuk/Shutterstock.

128 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

A second important issue for conservatives involves child care. Now that most mothers have joined fathers in the workplace, who’s minding the kids? Evidence sug- gests that today’s children are getting less—some people say much too little—attention from adults. In an age of two-career couples, home life is often the interaction of weary women and men with little time and energy left for their children. No one doubts that most parents do the best they can to raise their daughters and sons, but conserva- tives see in the popular statement that people should share a little “quality time” with the kids an apology for fathers and mothers who do too little parenting. This retreat from parenting may be why, after 1960, important measures of well-being among children—including rates of poverty, arrest, and even suicide—trended up (Popenoe, 1993a; Blankenhorn, 1995; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Although most conservatives support women in the workplace and also in positions of political leadership, most conservatives would also like to see government pol- icies that would strengthen traditional families. Sometimes what that means, according to conservatives, is gov- ernment should not do for people what they and family members ought to do for themselves. Conservatives typi- cally support policies, such as tax benefits that encourage people to marry, that will raise the importance of families in our national life. In addition, conservatives encourage all women and men to make their parents, partners, and children the highest priority. In sum, conservatives claim that the choices people make about how to live should be guided by what is best for the entire family.

Liberals: The Pursuit of Equality Liberals point out that at the time of the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. political system did not even define women (or African Americans and many other minorities) as full human beings. In a 2006 speech, Barack Obama (who was then a U.S. senator) reported meeting a 105-year-old African American woman who was born before women had the right to vote. When this woman was a child, no people of color expected to see one of their own in the U.S. Senate, never mind as president of the United States. Liberals speak out in favor of the steady, if slow, progress this country has made to expand the rights and opportunities available to women and to other minorities.

But liberals claim that, in this effort, there is still much work to do and there is always the danger that his- toric gains will be lost. As this chapter has shown, in the United States, most low-income jobs are filled by women. In addition, almost a century after women gained the right to vote, only a small share of our national political leaders are women—23.7 percent of House and Senate members in 2019. Looking at such numbers, liberals conclude that

In the end, of course, the view one takes of feminism— or of any issue related to gender—is a matter of values and politics. We now explore how politics shapes what peo- ple define as the social problems and solutions related to gender.

POLITICS AND GENDER

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 4.6 Analyze gender inequality from various positions

on the political spectrum.

According to the Declaration of Independence, “All men are created equal.” If we take this statement to mean that all people should be equal, we would have to define gen- der inequality as a problem. However, most historians claim that our founding fathers did not intend to include women in this statement. Remember that, at the time, all of our country’s political leaders were men, and women had no political voice. Not surprisingly, the issue of gender inequality has sparked controversy ever since, and peo- ple’s views of this issue vary according to their political positions.

Conservatives: The Value of Families Although conservatives are cautious about change in gen- der roles, most accept and support the wider social role of today’s women. Only people who hold views on the far right would claim that women’s lives should be limited to the home. Such a position represents only a small percent- age of people in the United States but, estimates suggest, about 30 percent of men (and almost the same share of women) around the world (Farber, 2017).

Most conservatives realize that today’s families depend on the income of both wives and husbands, and many applaud the fact that an increasing number of leaders in both the Democratic and Republican parties are women.

But many conservatives see the historical trend toward gender equality as contributing to the problem of weaker families. In this view, many conservatives agree with Talcott Parsons, whose structural-functional theory described gender as a system of complementary roles that encourages men and women to depend on each other and to join together as they share a household. Beginning in the 1960s, as women attended college and entered the labor force in record numbers, the divorce rate went up, more people began living alone, and a rising share of chil- dren were born to unwed parents (see Chapter 13, “Family Life”).

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 129

simply because they are performed mostly by women. For example, laundry workers who wash clothes (typi- cally women) are paid less than the laundry truck drivers (mostly men) who transport the laundry, showing that our culture attaches less value to work done mostly by women than to work done mostly by men even when both types of work require about the same level of schooling, skill, and effort.

To counter this form of institutionalized discrimina- tion, some liberals support a policy of comparable worth, by which women and men would receive the same pay not just for doing the same work but also for doing different work that has the same value. In other words, supporters of a comparable worth policy claim that it is possible to measure the worth of different jobs in objective terms, and they note that women currently earn about 25 percent less than men for work of equal value. Although courts have debated this policy, the United States—unlike Great Britain and Australia—has no comparable worth laws (England, 1992; Huffman, Velasco, & Bielby, 1996; England, Hermsen, & Cotter, 2000).

Liberals claim that all these efforts at increasing gen- der equality have the support of a majority of U.S. adults. Indeed, survey data show that most U.S. adults are com- mitted, in principle, to equal rights for women and men (Smith et al., 2017).

The Radical Left: Change the System Most people who support feminism identify with its liberal form, seeking greater gender equality within the bounds of our current social institutions. But others believe more basic change is needed to move U.S. society toward gender

equality. For some people, the target of basic change is

the family. For example, Judith Stacey (1990:269–70) states, “‘The family’ is not ‘here to stay.’

Nor should we wish it were. On the contrary, I believe that all demo- cratic people, whatever their kin-

ship preferences, should work to hasten its demise.” The reason, Stacey explains, is that families

patriarchy is alive and well in the United States and gender inequality remains a serious social problem.

Liberals disagree with the conservative claim that the trend toward gender equality has weakened families. First, as liberals see it, conservatives have a nostalgic—and distorted—view of some golden age of family life built around visions drawn from the 1950s. Although television shows such as Leave It to Beaver celebrated the stay-at-home moms of that era, should we conclude that most women would choose to live that way? Would most women prefer to marry young and have children, or would they prefer to attend college and gain work experience before making choices about having a family? Furthermore, liberals view changes in families over recent decades not as families in decline but reflecting the reality that most families need two working adults to make ends meet.

Liberals claim that theirs is the true pro-family posi- tion because they seek government support for the kinds of families that actually exist today. One pressing need is affordable child care. Liberals support the expansion of child care programs by both employers and govern- ment so that women can have the same career opportu- nities as men. Similarly, liberals have fought to preserve the Affordable Care Act and are making efforts to expand health care coverage to all people as a strategy to benefit families.

Second, liberals believe that, just as more women have entered the labor force, men must take greater responsibil- ity for managing the home and caring for children. Liberals respond to conservative claims that working women neglect their children by suggesting that working men do more parenting—and also perform their fair share of housework.

Third, liberals place a high priority on policies that will raise the earning power of women. As they see it, raising the minimum wage to $10 or, better, $15 an hour and enforcing laws to eliminate workplace dis- crimination against women are both part of the solution. As the testimony of countless women tells us, the fight against sexual harass- ment in the workplace is just beginning. In addition, liberals support affirma- tive action (see Chapter 3, “Racial and Ethnic Inequality”) as an effective strategy to increase the presence of women in workplace settings, such as executive positions, that have excluded them in the past.

In addition, the U.S. economy has long provided lower pay for some jobs

Conservatives argue that strong families and effective parenting depend on at least one parent spending much of the day in the home with young children. Liberals counter that most women want the chance to pursue careers just as men do. In your opinion, how should men and women share the responsibilities of work and parenting?Iofoto/Fotolia.

130 Chapter 4 Gender Inequality

transported forward in time to our society today. No doubt, she would be startled to learn that most women now work for pay, that women not only vote (at a slightly higher rate than men) but also hold elected office, and that women actually outnumber men on the nation’s college campuses.

Our visitor from the past, knowing nothing about electricity, would expect most women to spend all day doing housework by hand. She would recall an average woman having about five children, a far cry from the one or two common now. She would be amazed to learn about birth control technology and would be pleased to learn that, in the United States today, very few women die in childbirth, which was a common occurrence in her day. In fact, women are taller and healthier and live decades lon- ger than in the past, and (unlike in 1850) women actually outlive men.

In light of such changes, perhaps our visitor from the past would be surprised to find that the social standing of women is still controversial. One reason that gender con- tinues to be debated is that our expectations have changed. Almost no one today accepts the centuries-old belief that women should remain in the home. Yet in many important ways, women are still unequal to men.

Where are we likely to be 150 years from now? Will the controversies surrounding gender inequality continue?

perpetuate traditional forms of inequality based on class, race, and gender.

Most left-radicals, however, target the current eco- nomic and political systems. The socialist feminist solution to gender inequality, described earlier, seeks to transform the capitalist economy into a socialist system. This trans- formation would end the trend toward economic inequal- ity and even eradicate class distinctions. At the same time, by encouraging people to perform domestic work collec- tively, men and women would become more equal and patriarchy would collapse.

Radical feminism offers the even more far-reaching vision of the elimination of gender itself. From this point of view, complete equality between women and men depends on liberating women from their historical task of childbear- ing and nurturing children. New reproductive technology makes such a vision theoretically possible.

The Left to Right table summarizes what we learn by applying the three political perspectives to the issue of gender inequality.

Going On from Here Imagine a woman living in the United States back in 1850—when the feminist movement was just beginning— stepping into a time machine and suddenly being

LEFT TO RIGHT

The Politics of Gender Inequality

Radical-Left View Liberal View Conservative View

What is the problem? Serious gender inequality is built into not only the institutions of U.S. society but also the biological task of childbearing.

Although U.S. society has made strides toward greater equality for women and men, women still have lower social standing.

The trend toward gender equality has boosted incomes but has weakened families and reduced the importance of parenting in people’s eyes.

What is the solution? There must be fundamental change in economic, political, and family institutions in order to eliminate gender inequality. Some suggest that reproduction, too, must change to liberate women from childbearing.

Government programs (including passing the ERA) can combat prejudice and discrimination; affirmative action will open more doors to women; a comparable worth policy would reduce income differences between women and men.

Cultural values should encourage people to strengthen their commitment to marriage partners and children.

JOIN THE DEBATE

1. Can you identify areas on which the three political perspectives agree? What are they?

2. Do you think that a century from now, gender inequality will be greater, about the same, or less than it is now? Why?

3. Which of the three political analyses of gender inequality included here do you find most convincing? Explain.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 131

with men. Keep in mind that the goal of gender equality has not yet been realized anywhere in the world.

At the same time, the worldwide trend is unmistak- able and probably unstoppable. Even acknowledging the gaps that remain and the conservative leanings of the cur- rent administration, the bigger picture shows that women are moving closer to equality with men, and all indications are that the trend will continue.

Almost certainly, the answer is yes. The gender gap in pay has remained much the same for decades. It continues partly because many people continue to assume that men and women should do different types of work. In addition, many people think that family responsibilities fall more to women than to men. To the extent that such beliefs remain with us, it seems likely that women will not do exactly the same work as men, earn as much as men, or share domestic chores equally

132

Is gender inequality in college athletics a problem? If so, what is the solution? Men have a dominant position in athletics at colleges and universities, just as they do in pro- fessional sports. Back in 1972, Title IX of the Civil Rights Act tried to eliminate gender inequal- ity in college athletics by mandating equal opportunity for both sexes in sports programs. But more than forty years later, gender equality seems a distant goal—if it is a goal at all. Look at the accompanying photos, which show the reality of inequality, and suggest ways to define a solution.

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 4 Gender Inequality

When the University of Alabama’s football team takes to the field, the event can draw more than 100,000 spectators. If you are more conservative, you probably think people should freely attend the events they wish, and if men’s sports generate more interest and revenue, so be it. But how do you square this view with the demands of Title IX?

D an

ny H

oo ks

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 133

Here, two Division I women’s  basketball teams face off in a mostly empty arena. If you are more liberal, this is clear evidence of the heart of the problem— men get the attention (and their sports get the money) and women are left to be cheerleaders or to play in front of small crowds. Title IX may be a good start, but more needs to be done. What additional steps would you suggest as a solution to this gender inequality?

Hint: Across the country, an undisputed fact is that the biggest crowds are drawn to male

athletics, especially football and basketball. These are also the sports that earn the most

revenues and pay the highest salaries to coaches. For example, the Alabama football program

had revenue of almost $108 million in 2017, and the head football coach earned more than

$11 million a year. The more to the left you are politically, the more you would support

government regulation that would make athletic opportunities the same for women and men.

The more to the right you are, the greater your support for allowing the market, that is, people

themselves, to decide what sports they wish to spend money to see; you would also point out

that allowing universities to make tens of millions of dollars from men’s basketball and football

provides money to pay for other “nonrevenue” sports, both women’s and men’s.

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 1. Walk around your campus with an eye toward gen-

der. Identify spaces (buildings, rooms, activities) that are dominated by one sex or the other—that is, plac- es that display the presence of mostly men or mostly women. Which are the men’s and women’s spaces? Which sex controls more space?

2. Visit a magazine rack in your local bookstore or super- market. Examine popular magazines that you think are aimed at women. What images are on the covers? What topics—stories, features, and photographs—do popular magazines consider to be “women’s issues”?

3. Identify an organization in your community or cam- pus that deals with violence against women and visit its office. What are its goals, and what strategies does it employ to achieve them?

4. Does popular music contain bias against women? Listen to at least two kinds of music (rap, hip-hop, rock, country, and so on), and see what messages about the life goals and relative power of females and males you can find.

Manny Millan/Sports Ilustrated/Getty Images.

134

What Is Gender?

4.1 Define important concepts including gender and gender stratification.

Sex is the biological distinction between females and males.

• Sex is determined at the moment when an embryo is conceived.

Gender refers to the personal traits and life chances that a society links to each sex, creating the cultural concepts of “feminine” and “masculine.”

• Gender is a dimension of social stratification.

Patriarchy is a social pattern in which males dominate females.

• Almost all societies display some degree of patriarchy.

• Gender stereotypes are a form of prejudice against women.

• Sexism is the assertion that one sex is less worthy than or even innately inferior to the other.

Making the Grade CHAPTER 4 Gender Inequality

gender (p. 104) the personal traits and life chances that a society links to being female or male sex (p. 104) the biological distinction between females and males gender stratification (p. 104) the unequal distribution of wealth, power, and privilege between men and women patriarchy (p. 104) a social pattern in which males dominate females matriarchy (p. 104) a social pattern in which females dominate males sexism (p. 106) the belief that one sex is innately superior to the other

Gender and Social Institutions

4.2 Analyze the importance of gender in the operation of major social institutions.

Family • In poor countries the world over, parents value sons

more than daughters, encouraging selective abortions and, in some cases, female infanticide.

• In the United States, gender shapes people’s experi- ence of marriage, which is often an unequal partner- ship that favors the man.

Education • Gender stereotyping steers women away from fields

of study (such as engineering and physics) considered masculine.

• Despite policies against gender bias in college sports, men’s sports receive more funding and public attention.

Mass Media • Historically, television and film have cast women

mainly in supporting roles.

• Advertising reinforces gender stereotypes by pitch- ing certain products (such as household cleansers) to women and others (such as cars and banking services) to men.

Politics • Women hold 23.3% of seats in the world’s 190 parliaments.

• In the United States, until 1920 women were barred from voting in national elections.

• In 2016, Hillary Clinton was the first woman to be nominated for the presidency by a major party.

Religion • Traditional religions allow only men to be leaders.

• Many religious writings teach women to submit to the social dominance of men.

Military • Until recently, the claim that women are not as strong

as men has allowed the military to bar women from certain assignments.

• Women represent 16.4% of the U.S. armed forces.

• Sexual assault directed at women is a serious problem in today’s military.

Work • Many people still think of certain jobs as “women’s

work” and others as “men’s work.”

• Although gender discrimination in the workplace is illegal, officials investigate thousands of discrimina- tion complaints each year.

Gender Stratification

4.3 Examine how gender stratification is found in  everyday life.

Income is an important dimension of gender inequality.

• In the United States, women working full time earn 81% as much as men.

• Child-rearing duties often cause women to fall behind their male colleagues in career advancement.

Housework is still performed mainly by women, despite the fact that women have been entering the labor force in record numbers in recent years.

Violence against women is a serious problem throughout the world. U.S. government agencies receive more than 1

Chapter 4 Gender Inequality 135

feminism (p. 123) a political movement that seeks the social equality of women and men

million reports of nonsexual assaults and 272,000 reports of sexual assaults against women each year.

Sexual harassment came to be defined as a social prob- lem in the 1980s; about 50% of women surveyed claim to have received unwanted sexual attention in the work- place.

Our ideas about sexuality and beauty have consequences for giving men power over women. Reproduction is also an important issue because controlling reproduction gives women the freedom to work outside the home.

glass ceiling (p. 116) subtle discrimination that effectively blocks the movement of women into the highest positions in organizations sexual harassment (p. 118) unwanted comments, gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature

Theories of Gender Inequality

4.4 Apply sociological theory to the issue of gender inequality.

Structural-Functional Analysis: Gender and Complementarity

Structural-functional theory views gender in terms of complementary roles linking men and women, building families, and integrating society as a whole.

• In traditional societies, women bear children and are primarily responsible for the household; men link the family to the larger world by their participation in the workforce.

• With greater control over reproduction, modern societ- ies have less gender specialization.

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Gender in Everyday Life

Symbolic-interaction theory highlights how gender influ- ences people’s actions in everyday situations.

• Gender involves social power: Our society gives men greater freedom in personal behavior and allows them to use more space than women do.

• Language also reflects the social dominance of males.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Gender and Inequality

Social-conflict theory sees gender as a dimension of social inequality, with men having greater wealth, power, and privileges than women.

• Friedrich Engels linked gender stratification to men’s desire to pass on property to their offspring.

• The rise of capitalism fostered patriarchy by forcing men to work long hours in factories; the burden of housework and child rearing fell to women.

intersection theory (p. 123) analysis of how race, class, and gender interact, often creating multiple disadvantages for some categories of people

POLITICS AND GENDER Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions

4.6 Analyze gender inequality from various positions on the political spectrum.

Conservatives: The Value of Families

Conservatives place great value on the traditional family.

• Conservatives see the trend toward gender equal- ity as a problem. They say it weakens families and reduces the importance of parenting, and claim that children may suffer when both parents work outside the home.

Liberals: The Pursuit of Equality

Liberals object to gender inequality that limits the earning power of women and discourages women from assuming leadership positions.

• Liberals look to government to raise the social standing of women by putting an end to gender discrimination and by increasing women’s economic opportunities and providing affordable child care.

The Radical Left: Change the System

Radicals on the left claim that gender stratification is deeply rooted in present social institutions.

• Radicals on the left believe that gender equality re- quires basic change in the economy, political system, and family life. Socialism would allow women and men to work collectively for the benefit of everyone.

Feminism

4.5 Identify the foundations of feminism and distinguish three types of feminism.

Feminism is an important social-conflict theory in sociology.

• Liberal feminism seeks reform within existing institu- tional arrangements.

• Socialist feminism links gender equality to broader class revolution, following Marxist principles.

• Radical feminism calls for the elimination of gender it- self, partly through the use of new reproductive tech- nologies to liberate women from childbearing.

136

5.4 Discuss several current issues and controversies involving sexuality.

5.5 Apply sociological theory to issues involving sexuality.

5.6 Analyze issues involving sexuality from various positions on the political spectrum.

5.1 Explain why sex is both a biological and cultural issue.

5.2 Discuss changes in sexual attitudes and practices over the history of the United States.

5.3 Describe four sexual orientations.

Chapter 5

Sexuality and Inequality

Learning Objectives

Constructing the Problem

How can sex be the cause of social problems?

For most of our country’s history, people didn’t talk much about sex, and most people considered any sex- ual activity other than intercourse by married partners to be wrong.

R ob

er ts

H . A

rm st

ro ng

/C la

ss ic

S to

ck /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

R aw

pi xe

l . c om

/S hu

tte rs

to ck

Does the law decide how people can or cannot express their sexuality?

Yes. For example, during most of our country’s history, homosexual activity was against the law; only in 2015 did same-sex couples gain the right to marry everywhere in the United States.

W av

eb re

ak M

ed ia

L td

/1 23

R F.

How is sexuality a dimension of inequality?

Research shows that gay, lesbian, and transgender people are subjected to both prejudice and discrimination.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 137

Tracking the Trends

As this century began, a handful of cities and towns across the United States had enacted local laws to allow same-sex couples to marry, but these marriages were later declared to be illegal. Then, in 2004, Massachusetts became the first state to permit same-sex marriage. In the decade that followed, thirty-seven states (and Washington, D.C.) enacted same-sex marriage laws. In June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled, in its landmark 5-to-4 decision Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, that same-sex couples everywhere in the country have a constitutional right to marry. This transformation surely represents one of the most remarkable social shifts in this nation’s history.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Massachusetts Vermont

Iowa New Hampshire

New York

Delaware Rhode Island

Minnesota California

Hawaii New Mexico New Jersey

Connecticut Washington, DC Illinois Oregon

Pennsylvania Indiana

Oklahoma Utah

Virginia Wisconsin Colorado Nevada Alaska Idaho

West Virginia North Carolina

Arizona Wyoming

Kansas South Carolina

Montana

2015

Washington Maryland

Maine

Florida Alabama

With Supreme Court ruling,

June 26, 2015: North Dakota South Dakota

Nebraska Texas

Missouri Arkansas Louisiana Michigan

Ohio Kentucky

Tennessee Mississippi

Georgia

SOURCE: National Conference of State Legislatures (2015).

138 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

Chapter Overview What is sex, and how is sex both a biological and a cultural issue? This chapter exam- ines sexual attitudes and practices over the course of our nation’s history, highlighting the sexual revolution and society’s increasing support of gay and transgender rights. It also explores controversial sexuality-related issues such as pornography and pros- titution and the issues of reproductive rights and abortion. You will learn about the major types of sexually transmitted diseases and behaviors that put people at risk. Throughout the chapter, you will see ways in which sexuality is a dimension of social inequality. You will carry out theoretical analysis of sexuality and inequality and also learn how “problems” and “solutions” involving sexuality reflect people’s political attitudes.

recalls that six or seven hands went up, some of them raised tentatively.

Then the speaker requested that all the women close their eyes. Then he repeated the request. After a moment, the leader asked everyone to keep their hands where they were but to open their eyes. People turned around in amazement to realize that almost every woman had a hand in the air (Gilbert, 2017).

Sophie Gilbert, an activist working to oppose sexual ha- rassment in the workplace, recalls an experience she had some years ago. Gilbert was a decade out of college, work- ing as a waitress, and she decided to sign up for a weekend seminar to help young women advance their careers. Standing in front of a room containing about 200 women, the speaker asked that any woman who had been sexually or physically abused while at work raise her hand. Gilbert

izusek/E+/Getty Images.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 139

contains twenty-three matching chromosomes, which are the biological codes that determine a child’s sex and other physical traits.

Sex: A Cultural Issue Sociologists point out that sexual attitudes and practices, like all behavior, vary from one cultural setting to another. In addition, some of the most important cultural norms guide the selection of sexual partners. These norms involve age (some societies accept sexual activity on the part of children, although others define such behavior as a seri- ous problem), marital status (some societies rigidly restrict sexual activity to married partners, but others are more permissive), and sex of partner (societies differ dramatically in their attitudes toward sexuality involving people of the same sex). In the United States, historical norms for sexual activity have favored adult, female–male married partners engaging in vaginal intercourse.

In reality, of course, much sexual behavior in our society does not conform to this model. People have sex within and without marriage, sexual relationships involve both other-sex and same-sex partners, and sex- ual activity includes anal as well as vaginal intercourse, oral-genital contact, and masturbation alone or with a partner. In addition, some people by choice or by circum- stance engage in little or no sexual activity (Laumann et al., 1994).

There are two important lessons from Gilbert’s experi- ence. First, sexual harassment and other abuse are far more widespread than most people have been willing to realize. Second, because males have dominated the workplace, females have never been comfortable calling out men on their behavior.

In the final months of 2017, this silence was shattered with the publication in the New York Times of numerous claims of sexual harassment against Harvey Weinstein, a powerful Hollywood film producer. Then women across the country—first by the thousands and soon by the tens of thousands—began speaking out on social media say- ing that they, too, had experienced sexual abuse. The #MeToo movement was underway, bringing about a na- tional reckoning over this long-standing social epidemic. By the beginning of 2018, 100 million women had joined voices saying they had been victimized and demanding change.

This chapter will investigate a number of problems re- lated to sexuality, including sexual orientation, sexual ha- rassment, and other issues involving inequality. We begin with a look at some basic facts about sex itself.

What Is Sex? 5.1 Explain why sex is both a biological and cultural

issue.

Sex is a concept that reflects both human biology and human culture. To better understand the meaning of sex, we need to examine sex from a biological and a cultural perspective.

Sex: A Biological Issue Sex is the biological distinction between females and males. Biologically speaking, humanity is divided into two sexes, which have different reproductive organs—the genitals— that are also called primary sex characteristics. In addition, when people of each sex mature, they typically display other distinctive physical traits, which are called secondary sex characteristics. For example, females develop breasts and wider hips, and males develop more muscle and body hair. As we shall see later in this chapter, sexual identity has become more complex as the transgender movement has challenged the idea that all people can be described using a binary distinction between female and male.

The term sex also refers to activity that leads to sexual gratification and possibly reproduction. From a biological point of view, reproduction is vital to the survival of a species. Among humans, a female provides an ovum, or egg, which is fertilized by a male’s sperm through sex- ual intercourse to form a fertilized embryo. The embryo

Before the sexual revolution, U.S. society tolerated little in the way of public displays of sexuality, as suggested by this visiting day for World War II military personnel.

B et

tm an

n/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

140 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

Gradually, advances in technology (including the rubber condom, first produced in the 1850s) led to more control over reproduction. This greater control encour- aged societies to allow more choice about sexual practices. Other factors also increased the level of sexual freedom. After  1920, the migration from farms and small towns across the United States to industrial cities meant that mil- lions of young men and women lived and worked together beyond the control of parents. The result was an unprec- edented level of sexual freedom, which is one of the rea- sons that this decade came to be known as the Roaring Twenties.

Researchers, too, played a part in this trend toward greater sexual freedom. After World War II, landmark research involving sexuality was carried out by Alfred Kinsey (1894–1956). To many people, it was remarkable that researchers were investigating sex, which had never even been widely discussed in public. The Defining

Sexual Attitudes in the United States 5.2 Discuss changes in sexual attitudes and practices

over the history of the United States.

Attitudes and behavior involving sex have changed over the course of this nation’s history. During the colonial era, European settlers had no effective means of birth control. Therefore, most communities had strict norms allowing sex only by married couples for the purpose of reproduc- tion. For example, the New England Puritans condemned sex outside marriage and considered any sex (including masturbation) not intended to result in conception to be sinful. Without strict rules to control people’s behavior, they believed, the ever-present temptation of sex would lead to an excessive focus on sex, sex outside of marriage, unwanted pregnancy, and prostitution.

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment Alfred Kinsey: Talking Openly About Sex Alfred Kinsey did something no researcher before had dared to do: He asked people to talk about their sex lives. From the point of view of today’s “tell-all” society, that may not seem very controversial. But in Kinsey’s day—some seventy-five years ago—sex was a topic that was off limits for polite conversation and certainly not something people talked about with strangers.

In 1942, Kinsey founded the Institute for Sex Research at Indiana University. In the years that followed, he and a dozen research assistants interviewed more than 11,000 men and women about their sexual behavior. His first book, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (Kinsey, Pomeroy, & Martin, 1948), despite pages of dry, scientific analysis, sold more than a half- million copies. A second volume, Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (Kinsey et al., 1953), attracted even more readers. Apparently, many people in the United States had a greater interest in sex than they were willing to admit.

Newspapers reported some of Kinsey’s findings, especially his discovery that men and women in the United States were far less conventional about sex than most people imagined. A large share of Kinsey’s subjects confessed to breaking cultural taboos of that time: Almost half of female subjects reported having sexual intercourse before they married, and one-third of married men said that they had been sexually unfaithful to their wives.

Looking back, we can now see flaws in the way Kinsey conducted his research. In his eagerness to find people willing

to talk about sexual experiences, Kinsey ended up using far too many college students. He also found willing participants among people in prison. At the same time, he almost completely ignored older men and women and those who were rural and poor. As a result, Kinsey’s subjects almost certainly were not representative of the U.S. population. But despite this shortcoming, this research marked a defining moment in our nation’s history. Kinsey made a difference by bringing sex out of the closet.

Reports of Alfred Kinsey’s survey of human sexual practices caused a sensation in the news media in the mid-1900s.

H ul

to n

A rc

hi ve

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 141

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Pe rc

en ta

ge R

ep o

rt in

g T

w o

o r

M o

re S

ex u

al P

ar tn

er s

by A

ge 2

0

100%

Born 1933 to 1942

Reached age 20 before sexual revolution

Reached age 20 after sexual revolution

Born 1953 to 1962

16%

62%

56%

48%

Men Women

Diversity Snapshot Figure 5–1 The Sexual Revolution: Moving Away

from the Double Standard

Among people who came of age before the sexual revolution (shown on the left), a smaller share had two or more sexual partners by age twenty compared with people who came of age after the sexual revolution (shown on the right). The difference is especially marked among women.

SOURCE: Laumann et al. (1994).

Moment feature explains how Kinsey helped change a whole nation’s way of thinking.

The Sexual Revolution The first wave of sexual freedom during the Roaring Twenties and the groundbreaking Kinsey research of the 1940s and 1950s set the stage for even greater change. By the late 1960s, young people created a culture of freedom summed up in the cry “Sex, drugs, and rock-and-roll!” This cultural move- ment came to be called the “sexual revolution.”

Again, technology played a part, as 1960 saw the introduction of the birth control pill. Unlike condoms and diaphragms, both of which had to be applied at the time of intercourse, the pill could be taken at a woman’s con- venience, allowing her to more readily make a decision to engage in sex. This ease, combined with the pill’s high effectiveness, ended the historical connection between het- erosexual intercourse and pregnancy.

Figure 5–1 confirms that, by the 1960s, the U.S. popu- lation became more free and easy about sex. Among those born between 1933 and 1942, which is to say people who reached the age of twenty before 1962, 56 percent of men and 16 percent of women reported having had two or more sex- ual partners before age twenty. But a single generation later, among people born between 1953 and 1962, 62 percent of men and 48 percent of women reported two or more sexual partners by age twenty (Laumann et al., 1994:198).

The Sexual Revolution and Feminism Notice in Figure 5–1 how the gender gap in sexual activity became smaller among people who came of age during the sexual revolution. This trend suggests that greater sexual free- dom also meant moving away from the traditional double standard by which men claimed some sexual freedom but women were expected to delay sex until they were married and, after that, forever to remain sexually faithful to their husbands.

During the 1960s, however, women organized to oppose their long-standing domination by men. In fact, many feminists placed attitudes about sexuality at the heart of male domination. Kate Millet (1970) summed up the argument, saying that sex is really about power: To the extent that men view women as mere sexual creatures and women accept this definition of themselves, men will dominate women. The word “sexism” entered our national vocabulary, thereby constructing a new social problem.

Feminists challenged other dimensions of male power as well, demanding equal pay for equal work, condemning pornography, and taking a stand against sexual violence, including rape and incest. In addition, women sought access to contraception (which in the 1960s was still illegal in some states) and abortion (which was illegal everywhere

in the United States until 1973). In short, out of the sexual revolution emerged the claim that only one person has the right to control a woman’s body—the woman herself.

The Sexual Counterrevolution Liberals typically supported feminism and the movement to increase sexual freedom. By the 1970s, however, a con- servative sexual counterrevolution was under way calling for a return to traditional “family values.” As conservatives saw it, the 1960s had been a decade in which U.S. society had come apart, and what the country needed now was to rebuild families and for people to take more personal responsibility for their behavior.

The conservative reaction to the sexual revolution may have slowed the movement toward sexual freedom, but it did not turn back the clock. Most people who have come of age since the 1960s still hold to the liberal idea that individu- als should decide matters of sexual behavior for themselves. Most also choose to be sexually active. Today, 58 percent of young people (59 percent of men and 57 percent of women) report having sexual intercourse by their senior year in high school (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017).

142 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

older women, which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015. Critics claim that a pill to boost sexual desire in women is another effort by pharma- ceutical companies to manufacture a social problem and provide an expensive solution (Fox, 2015; Kirkey, 2017).

Sexual Orientation 5.3 Describe four sexual orientations.

Sexual orientation refers to a person’s romantic and emotional attraction to another person. Based on sexual orientation, peo- ple are drawn to partners of the same sex, the other sex, or both sexes, or they feel no interest in any sexual partners.

The most common sexual orientation, approved by cultures the world over, is heterosexuality (hetero is Greek, meaning “other”), sexual attraction to someone of the other sex. In all societies, a small but significant share of people favor homosexuality (homo is Greek for “same”), which is sexual attraction to someone of the same sex.

Most people think of heterosexuality and homosex- uality as opposites with most people clearly in one cate- gory or the other. But as Kinsey discovered, many people have varying degrees of both sexual orientations. Also, keep in mind that sexual attraction is not the same as sex- ual behavior. Although most people have experienced some attraction to a person of the same sex, for example, only a small share of people have actually engaged in homosex- ual behavior. The fact that many people do not act on this attraction may reflect the operation of cultural norms that discourage same-sex relationships.

The fact that sexual orientation is often not clear-cut calls attention to the existence of bisexuality, sexual attrac- tion to people of both sexes. Some bisexual people experi- ence equal attraction to females and males; others have a stronger attraction to people of one sex than the other. There are also many cases of bisexuals who experience attraction to both sexes but limit their sexual behavior to partners of one sex.

Finally, not everyone experiences sexual attraction at all. Asexuality is the absence of sexual attraction to people of either sex. Throughout the population, the extent of asexu- ality increases gradually as people get older.

We now take a closer look at issues related to homo- sexuality.

Homosexuality Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation found among a small share of a population. To the extent that het- erosexuality is the cultural norm, homosexual people—gay men and lesbians—are pushed to the margins of society. Some people may even view homosexuality as a social problem because it conflicts with their moral standards.

The Continuing Sexual Revolution: Older People During the past decade, the men and women who began the sexual revolution of the 1960s—people who are now in their sixties and seventies—are carrying that movement forward as they enter old age. An old stereotype portrays older people as past their years of sexual activity. For many older men in their eighties and nineties, there is some truth to this claim. “Trying to have sex at ninety,” quipped comedian George Burns, “is like trying to shoot pool with a rope.” But just as the birth control pill helped the 1960s generation spark a sexual revolution, another pill—this time in the form of Viagra, Levitra, and Cialis—offers the promise that the baby boomers will keep love alive as they grow old. These drugs that treat male “erectile dysfunc- tion,” or ED for short, help otherwise healthy men achieve and maintain an erection, allowing more people to con- tinue sexual activity in later life.

With or without drugs, research confirms, most older people say they are satisfied with their sex lives, and most remain sexually active well into old age. Among those between the ages of sixty-five and seventy-four, 85 percent of men and 62 percent of women report currently having a sex- ual partner. Among people between the ages of seventy-five and eighty-five, 78 percent of men and 41  percent of women said the same (Waite et al., 2009; Galinsky, McClintock, & Waite, 2014). The difference between the sexes reflects women’s greater life expectancy—most older men live with a spouse, and most older women do not.

The pharmaceutical industry has a financial interest in defining erectile dysfunction as a new problem. Its adver- tising may make increasing numbers of older men think they should be having more sex than they are, pushing up the sale of drugs to treat erectile dysfunction. Doctors now write millions of these prescriptions each year, which send more than $4 billion to the drug companies.

The good news is that ED pills have extended sexual activity for millions of older people. Having more sex, say the researchers, means partners have a closer relationship and look and act in a more youthful way. At the same time, the “blue pill” is not a magic wand that allows a seventy-five- year-old male to perform sexually like he did in his twenties. In addition, like any other drug, these pills can cause side effects, which include headaches and even persistent and painful erections. Then, too, it is natural for the level of hor- mones that encourage sexual activity to decline as people move into old age. This fact raises the question as to what extent the medical and pharmaceutical establishment should manipulate human biology in the interest of higher profits.

But given the popularity of these male drugs, many older men seem quite happy with their effects. Given the amount of money being made, there is little surprise in the fact that drug companies created a “little pink pill” for

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 143

Although most do not act on it, many do: Kinsey estimated that one-third of men and one-eighth of women engaged in one or more homosexual acts at some point in their lives, typically in adolescence. In addition, Kinsey estimated that 4 percent of men and 2 percent of women were exclusively homosexual in their orientation, meaning they had only same-sex desires, engaged in only same-sex sexual activity, and thought of themselves as gay men or lesbians.

In the 1990s, research by Edward Laumann and his colleagues (1994) provided a more precise estimate of homosexuality. Laumann concluded that 2.8 percent of men and 1.4 percent of women (about 6 million people) defined themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Figure 5–2 presents recent government data showing that about 6 per- cent of men and 17 percent of women between the ages of eighteen and forty-four reported engaging in at least some homosexual activity. At the same time, just 1.9 per- cent of men and 1.3 percent of women defined themselves as homosexual (Copen, Chandra, & Febo-Vasquez, 2016).

What Determines Sexual Orientation? The causes of sexual orientation include many factors, such as genetics, brain structure, hormones, life experiences, and culture. Researchers point to both culture and biology as shaping sexual orientation.

Cultural Factors In earlier periods of history, most societies paid little attention to sexual orientation. The French social philosopher Michel Foucault (1990) notes that societies did

This attitude has long been a cause of prejudice and dis- crimination directed toward gay men and lesbians.

In the 1970s, about three-fourths of U.S. adults claimed that same-sex relations were wrong. In recent decades, there has been a dramatic increase in the acceptance of homosex- uality. By 2016, the share of adults saying that homosexual- ity is wrong had declined to 40 percent (Smith et al., 2017).

Today, reflecting the increasing acceptance of homo- sexuality, all states and the federal government have laws banning discrimination based on sexual orientation. In 2011, the U.S. military ended its historical ban on same-sex behav- ior. In 2015, as shown in the Tracking the Trends figure at the beginning of this chapter, the U.S. Supreme Court declared (the case of Obergefell v. Hodges) that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry. At the same time, other forms of discrimination continue with the support of law, includ- ing, for example, the fact that many religious organizations refuse to ordain gay men or lesbians as leaders.

Prejudice against gay men and lesbians also exists on college campuses. In one study, 70 percent of gay and lesbian students (73 percent of women and 65 percent of men) reported experiencing harassment based on their sex- uality (Cantor et al., 2015).

Hostility toward gay men and lesbians can spill beyond prejudice to fuel violence. The FBI (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017) records some 1,200 hate crimes against gays and lesbians each year, and the true number is certainly far higher. Many of these violent acts—including assault and even murder—are directed at people simply because of their sexual orientation. According to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (2017), more than 1,000 lesbians and gay men in the United States reported being victims of anti-gay violence in 2016. The true number of people victimized by hate crimes is unknown but certainly much greater than the number reported. What is more precisely known is that during 2016, seventy-seven homicides across the United States were defined as hate crimes based on sex- uality (this includes forty-nine lives lost during the mass shooting at Pulse nightclub in Orlando, Florida).

People of color are especially likely to experience hate- ful action due to sexual orientation. Of all people who self-identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and ques- tioning (LGBTQ), people of color were more than twice as likely as whites to report physical violence directed against them (National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, 2017).

The Extent of Homosexuality What share of the U.S. population has a homosexual orientation? This question is difficult to answer because, as we have already explained, sexual orientation is not a matter of people falling into neat categories. The extent of homosexuality, therefore, depends on exactly how you define the term.

Alfred Kinsey (1948) claimed that most women and men experience at least some same-sex attraction.

5.5%

0%

4%

8%

12%

16%

2%

6%

10%

14%

18%

20%

Reporting any homosexual

activity

Claiming a bisexual identity

Claiming a homosexual

identity

R es

p o

n d

en ts

b et

w ee

n A

ge s

18 a

n d

4 4 17.4%

6.2%

2.0% 1.9% 1.3%

Men Women

Diversity Snapshot Figure 5–2 Measuring Homosexual Orientation

How one defines homosexual orientation affects the number of people considered to be homosexual.

SOURCE: Copen, Chandra, & Febo-Vasquez, (2016).

144 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

woman, doing women’s work, even marrying another man. Among the Sambia of New Guinea, most boys engage in a sexual ritual in which they perform oral sex on older men with the idea that ingesting semen will enhance the young men’s masculinity. In central Mexico, a region where reli- gious traditions recognize gods who are both female and male, the local culture recognizes not only females and males but also muxes (pronounced “MOO-shays”) as a third sexual category. Muxes are men who dress and act as women, some only on ritual occasions, some all the time. The Diversity: Race, Class, & Gender box takes a closer look. Such diversity of sexual expression around the world shows that sexual orientation has much to do with society

not identify homosexuals as a specific category of the popu- lation until the late nineteenth century. This is not to say that people in earlier times did not have same-sex experiences; societies simply took little note of it. But once societ- ies socially constructed the categories of “heterosexual” and “homosexual,” people who had homosexual experi- ences began to be set apart as “different” and also became targets of prejudice and discrimination. This historical pat- tern provides evidence that sexual inequality and how we express and experience our sexuality are shaped by culture.

Sexual behavior also varies from culture to culture. Among the Chukchee Eskimo of Siberia, a man may take on the role known as a berdache, dressing and acting like a

DIVERSITY: RACE, CLASS, & GENDER

Female, Male, or Something Else? The Muxes of Mexico Alejandro Taledo, age sixteen, stands on a street corner in Juchitán, a small town in the state of Oaxaca, which lies in the middle of southern Mexico. Called Alex by her friends, she has finished a day of selling flowers with her mother and the pair now waits for the bus that will take them home for dinner.

As you already may have noticed, Alejandro is commonly a boy’s name. In fact, this young Mexican was born a boy. But several years ago, Alex decided that she felt she was a girl, and she decided to live true to her own feelings.

In this community, she is not alone. Juchitán and the surrounding region are known not only for beautiful pottery and delicious food but also for the large number of gays, lesbians, and transgender people who live there. This fact may surprise people who think of Mexico as a traditional country, especially when it comes to gender and sexuality. But, as with the United States, Mexico has become more tolerant in matters of gender identity and sexual orientation, and in 2015 same-sex marriage became legal everywhere in Mexico (in some locations, requiring a court order). Nowhere is tolerance for various sexual orientations as strong and widespread as it is in the region around Juchitán. In this area of Mexico, transgender people are called muxes (pronounced MOO-shays), which is based on the Spanish word mujer meaning “woman.” This means that the local culture does not divide people into only the neat categories of “man” and “woman” but recognizes a third gender category as well. Some muxes wear women’s clothing and act almost entirely in a feminine way. Others adopt a feminine look and behavior only on special occasions. One of the most popular events is a celebration that takes place every year in November and is attended by more than 2,000 muxes and their families. A highlight of the event is a competition won by the “transvestite of the year.”

Anthropologists tell us that the acceptance of transgender people in central Mexico has its roots in the culture that existed there centuries before the arrival of the Spanish. At that time, a person with ambiguous gender was viewed as especially wise and talented. The region’s history includes accounts of

Aztec priests and Mayan gods who cross-dressed and were considered to be both male and female. In the sixteenth century, Spanish colonists and especially Catholic clergy attempted to suppress local gender tolerance. But an unusually high acceptance of transgender identities continues to this day in Juchitán, a region where many people speak only their ancient Zapotec language rather than Spanish.

And so it is in Juchitán that muxes are respected, accepted, and, on special occasions, even celebrated. Muxes are successful in business and take leadership roles in the church and in politics. Most important, they are loved by friends and family alike. Alejandro lives with her parents and five siblings and helps her mother both at home and working on the street selling flowers. Her father, Victor Martinez Jimenez, is a local construction worker who speaks only Zapotec. He still refers to Alex as “him” but says, “It was God who sent him, and why would I reject him? He helps his mother very much. Why would I get mad?” Alex’s mother, Rosa Taledo Vicente, adds, “Every family considers it a blessing to have one gay son. While daughters marry and leave home, a muxe cares for his parents in their old age” (Gave, 2005; Lacey, 2008; Rosenberg, 2008; Archibold & Villegas, 2015; Kahn, 2015).

What Do You Think? 1. To what extent do you think that U.S. society is tolerant

of people wishing to combine male and female dress and qualities? Explain.

2. Muxes are people who are born males. How do you think the local people in this story would feel about women who want to dress and act like men? Do you think such people would enjoy the same degree of tolerance and support? Why or why not?

3. California recently became the first state to allow people to declare their sexual identity as female, male, or “other.” Do you support such a policy? Explain your opinion.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 145

sexual orientation than African American people are for their skin color, and both categories of people are entitled to the same legal protection from discrimination (Herek, 1991; Schmalz, 1993).

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What have researchers learned about the origin of sexual orientation? Why does it matter whether we consider sexual orientation to be mostly biological or simply a personal choice about how to live?

Homosexuality, Inequality, and Public Policy Back in 1960, homosexuality was widely viewed as wrong almost everywhere in the United States. Some people con- sidered this sexual orientation to be a sickness; even the American Psychiatric Association included homosexual- ity in its list of mental disorders until 1973. Discrimination against gay men and lesbians was common, and compa- nies, schools, government agencies, and the military rou- tinely refused to hire people thought to be homosexual. Just as important, it was common for employees found to be gay or lesbian to be fired for no reason other than their sexual orientation. In this hostile environment, it is easy to see why most lesbians and gay men stayed in the closet, keeping their homosexuality secret from all but a few close friends.

Since then, as we have explained, attitudes toward homosexuality have become more accepting. As shown in Figure 5–3, twenty years ago the percentage of U.S. adults who claimed that homosexuality is wrong was about 65 per- cent; by 2016, this share had dropped to 40.4 percent (Smith et al., 2017). Such surveys also show that a majority of people now believe that homosexual people should have the same job opportunities and basic civil rights as everyone else.

itself (Herdt, 1993; Blackwood & Wieringa, 1999; Gave, 2005; Lacey, 2008; Rosenberg, 2008).

Finally, a few sociological studies claim that patterns of socialization may shape sexual orientation. One study of opposite-sex twins found a higher likelihood of homo- sexual orientation among people raised in a gender-neutral environment than among those raised according to conven- tional ideas of masculine and feminine behavior (Bearman & Brückner, 2002).

Biological Factors Culture may play a part in the way soci- eties think about sexuality, but on the individual level, most evidence points to the conclusion that sexual orientation is rooted in human biology. Like being left- or right-handed, sexual orientation appears to be largely fixed at birth.

The neurobiologist Simon LeVay (1993) claims that the key to sexual orientation is found in the brain. LeVay stud- ied the brains of homosexual men and heterosexual men and noted a difference in the hypothalamus, an organ of the brain that regulates the body’s hormone levels. Biologists have established that hormone levels—especially testos- terone levels in men—affect sexual orientation. They claim that small differences in the brain can play a large part in establishing a person’s sexual orientation (Grady, 1992).

Genes, as well as hormones, may affect sexual orien- tation. In a study of forty-four pairs of brothers, all homo- sexual, researchers found that thirty-three of the pairs had a unique feature on the X chromosome (one of the genetic traits affecting human sexuality). Some researchers think this might be evidence of a “gay gene,” noting that the gay brothers had a remarkably high number of gay male rela- tives on their mother’s side, the source of the X chromosome (Hamer & Copeland, 1994). To date, however, no research has conclusively identified this gene. The most recent stud- ies, called “epigenetic” research, suggest that sexual orien- tation is caused by genes and also “epi- factors” that affect how genes are activated and how fetuses respond to hor- mones in the womb. The focus here is still on biology with the added claim that the fetal environment may affect how the biological process unfolds (Blue, 2012; Rice, Friberg, & Gavrilets, 2012).

EVALUATE

Scientists continue to investigate the social and biological causes of sexual orientation. So far, the evidence supports the conclusion that biology plays a major part in how people experience sexual attrac- tion. But there is still much to learn. Although biology may be the key to sexual orientation, keep in mind that the process may not be exactly the same for everyone and that many people do not fit into a simple category as being gay or straight.

Why does it matter whether sexual orientation is caused by society or human biology? The reason is that, if sexual orientation is biological, it is as much beyond our control as the color of our skin. Therefore, gay men and lesbians are no more responsible for their

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

19 76

19 80

19 84

19 88

19 92

19 96

20 00

20 04

20 08

20 12

20 16

P er

ce n

ta g

e R

es p

o n

d in

g "

A lw

ay s

w ro

n g

" o

r "A

lm o

st a

lw ay

s w

ro n

g "

1987 79.0%

2016 40.4%

Figure 5–3 U.S. Attitudes toward Homosexual Relations, 1973–2016

In the United States, public acceptance of homosexual relations has increased dramatically since the early 1990s. In 2010, for the first time, a minority of U.S. adults characterized homosexual relations as wrong and the share has since fallen to 40 percent. SOURCE: Smith et al. (2017).

Survey Question: “What about sexual relations between two adults of the same sex—do you think it is always wrong, almost always wrong, wrong only sometimes, or not wrong at all?

146 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

tried to construct a problem and define the solution in a particular way. This movement claimed that the prob- lem is not homosexuality but the prejudice and discrimi- nation directed against gay people. The solution, then, is public acceptance of homosexuality on equal terms with heterosexuality.

Back in the 1960s, despite the considerable risks of being identified as homosexual, more and more lesbians and gay men stepped forward demanding acceptance. A turning point occurred on June 27, 1969, when police raided the Stonewall Inn, a bar in New York’s Greenwich Village. At that time, New York City police made a practice of raiding gay bars, arresting patrons, and recording their names, which often ended up being listed in the newspa- per. This policy effectively discouraged most people from visiting gay clubs. In this case, however, the patrons of the Stonewall Inn openly resisted police harassment. Joined in the street by other people, these men and women battled the police for the better part of two days. This event, which came to be known as the Stonewall Riot, marked a new militancy in the gay rights movement.

Within a few years of the Stonewall Riot, the gay rights movement began using the term homophobia to describe an aversion to or hostility toward people thought to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual. This concept reinforced the idea that the problem was not homosexuality but people who were intolerant of that sexual orientation. The success of the gay rights movement is evident in the increasingly widespread condemnation of homophobia as a social problem today.

The Transgender Movement The increasing acceptance of gay, lesbian, and bisexual people extends to a larger category of people who challenge conventional gender patterns. Transgender is a broad con- cept that refers to appearing or behaving in ways that challenge conventional cultural norms concerning how females and males should look and act. People in the transgender community may not conform to conventional ideas about sexual iden- tity or behavior. Rather, disregarding rigid and conven- tional ideas about femininity or masculinity, transgender people combine feminine and masculine traits or perhaps embody something entirely different. Sexual identity can also change over time. For this reason, transgender people may describe themselves as “gender fluid.”

From another angle, the transgender movement chal- lenges the idea that sexuality and gender identity must be expressed in the traditional binary terms of female and male. One dimension of this movement involves language. How will language evolve away from the use of pro- nouns “he” and “she,” which label people in conventional, binary terms, toward recognizing a wide range of gender

The growing acceptance of homosexuality appears to have been on the minds of the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court when in 2003 they handed down a landmark ruling (Lawrence et al. v. Texas) that struck down the Texas law ban- ning sodomy (“unnatural sex, especially anal intercourse”) between same-sex couples. This ruling invalidated similar laws that had been on the books in other states.

Same-Sex Marriage In 2004, the supreme court of Massachusetts ruled that gay men and lesbians had the right to marry. Gay rights advocates were elated by the Massachusetts decision and, between then and mid-2015, a total of thirty-seven states enacted laws providing for same-sex marriage. Then, in June 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples have the right to marry everywhere in the United States.

Around the world, twenty-six countries (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Green land, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Scotland, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, the United States, and Uruguay) legally recog- nize same-sex marriage. In Mexico, same-sex marriage is legal in some jurisdictions. Another seventeen nations rec- ognize same-sex partnerships or civil unions that extend to gays and lesbians many of the legal rights that married people have. Together, same-sex couples have some legal recognition in just 22 percent of the world’s countries (Pew Research Center, 2017).

In the United States, attitudes about same-sex mar- riage reflect people’s position on the political spectrum. In general, liberals support extending the right to marry to same-sex couples everywhere. Many conservatives oppose this trend, claiming that the traditional idea of marriage in the United States has always been a union between a man and a woman (Thomas, 2003; Pew Research Center, 2016). But some people who hold conservative “family values” do favor gay marriage—as well as the right of gay couples to adopt children. These conservatives claim that, if fam- ilies are good for people and good for society, we should encourage families for everyone, whether straight or gay (Sullivan, 2002).

The Gay Rights Movement The increasing acceptance of gay men and lesbians reflects decades of struggle by people who have supported the gay rights movement. The first gay rights group formed in Chicago in 1924, but the movement did not gain wide- spread public attention until the 1950s (Chauncey, 1994). Like all social movements, people in support of gay rights

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 147

Sexuality, Inequality, and Controversy 5.4 Discuss several current issues and controversies

involving sexuality.

Sexuality lies at the heart of a number of controversies in the United States today. Here we take a look at six key issues: pornography, sexual harassment, prostitution, teen pregnancy, abortion, and sexually transmitted diseases.

The transgender movement is gaining importance in the United States and other high-income nations. On the most basic level, this movement seeks freedom for indi- viduals to express their sexuality not according to conven- tional norms about femininity and masculinity but in ways that feel authentic to them.

Pornography Pornography refers to words or images intended to cause sexual arousal. This definition sounds clear enough, but people disagree about precisely what is and what is not pornographic. For one thing, there are various types of sexual material. Erotica includes the artistic portrayal of nudity, although not necessarily sexual activity. Then there is soft-core pornography, which shows or describes nudity and suggests sexual activity. Finally, hard-core pornography contains explicit descriptions or images of sexual acts.

Laws regulate certain types of pornography, includ- ing the depiction of sexual violence and sexual acts with children. More broadly, pornography becomes illegal when it crosses the line into obscenity, meaning the content

identities? The traditionally plural “they” is now widely used as a non-gender-specific singular pronoun. But while using “they” in this way avoids causing discomfort to those who do not wish to be labeled in conven- tional terms, its use implies an undefined sexual identity, which may be uncomfortable to other people (Hess, 2016).

Another dimension of the transgen- der movement involves restrooms. Public restrooms, which became widespread in U.S. cities in the decades after the Civil War, divided humanity into the categories of “female” and “male” just as they commonly divided humanity into categories of “colored” and “white.” The transgender movement raises questions about whether people should be free to choose whatever facilities they wish and also whether our society should label these facilities in a binary fashion using the conventional labels of “women” and “men.”

In 2016, state officials in North Carolina ignited a national controversy when they passed a law requiring people to use the bathroom corresponding to the sex that was assigned at their birth, rather than their current gender identity. The Obama administration weighed in supporting transgender rights by claiming that the North Carolina law violates federal Title IX civil rights standards. In 2017, in response to widespread criticism, North Carolina repealed the bathroom law (Hanna, 2017).

Transgender is not the same as sexual orientation. Transgender people may think of themselves as gay or les- bian, heterosexual, bisexual, or asexual; as some combina- tion of these categories; or in entirely different terms.

Everyone, of course, breaks from conventional gender patterns in some way or another. However, according to research, about 0.6 percent of adults in the United States (1.4 million people) have a transgender identity (Flores et al., 2016). The common shorthand LGBTQ refers to peo- ple who claim to be lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, or questioning their own sexuality. Of course, because some- one may identify with more than one of these categories, no exact number can be placed on the size of the total LGBTQ population. But estimates suggest that roughly 4.1 percent of the U.S. adult population—or about 10 million people—are within the LGBTQ community (Gates, 2017).

Transgender people commonly experience prejudice and are at risk for social rejection and other forms of dis- crimination as well as physical or sexual violence. Surveys find that many transgender people who experience prej- udice and discrimination also contend with emotional damage that, in serious cases, prompts them to consider or attempt suicide (Hass, Rodgers, & Herman, 2014).

The transgender movement is gaining importance in the United States and other high-income nations. On the most basic level, this movement seeks freedom for individuals to express their sexuality not according to conventional norms about femininity and masculinity but in ways that feel authentic to them.

Ze fr

og /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

148 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

porn cannot experience sexual arousal with real-life part- ners at all. In practice, then, viewing ever more graphic pornography may well desensitize some people to what we might describe as conventional sex (Luscombe, 2016).

There are other concerns. Like many forms of stimu- lating behavior, viewing pornography carries some risk of addiction. There is little hard evidence on this point, but few doubt that some young men seek online sexual arousal mul- tiple times every day. Some researchers point out that the vast majority of people who report viewing pornography appear to experience no ill effects. But a whole generation of young people is now growing up with a level of online sex- ual experience that would have been unimaginable to older generations, and some warning signs are clear. In addition, as computer technology advances, computer-based virtual real- ity is likely to make sexual simulations ever more powerful.

Pornography and Violence An additional issue is the possible link between pornography and violence. This concern predates the rise of internet pornography. Back in 1985, President Ronald Reagan created the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography (commonly called the Meese Commission, after Attorney General Edwin Meese) to investigate how people react to sexually explicit materials, including films and magazines. The commis- sion (1986) concluded that, in addition to causing sexual arousal and increasing people’s sexual activity, exposure to pornography encourages men to be aggressive and more accepting of violent acts such as rape. The commission added that pornography involving children encourages some men to desire sexual activity with them (a crime called pedophilia).

Critics challenged some of these conclusions, but the Meese report found widespread acceptance among con- servatives, who typically view sexually explicit material as encouraging immoral behavior. In addition, the report gained the support of some liberals including feminists who make the claim that rape is little more than “pornog- raphy put into practice.”

Other researchers, however, counter that the evidence does not support a causal connection between pornogra- phy and rape. Over the past twenty years, the expansion of the internet has dramatically increased public access to pornography. Yet, these analysts point out, the level of rape has not increased; in fact, it has fallen substantially (Chapman, 2007).

Is Pornography a Social Problem? Although many people have strong feelings about pornography, this ques- tion is not easily answered. Certainly, there is widespread opposition to sexual material involving children under age eighteen. Almost everywhere, police enforce federal and state laws against creating, selling, or possessing child pornography.

is offensive to a community’s sense of public decency. Of course, defining the concept of obscenity is also chal- lenging. Recognizing that what is acceptable in one place may be objectionable in another, the U.S. Supreme Court allows communities to ban sexual material as obscene if it violates “community standards of decency” and lacks any “redeeming social value.” Even within a local community, however, people are likely to disagree about what the stan- dards of decency should be.

Sexually explicit material is readily available in the United States. Most people are familiar with sexually explicit magazines, books, movies, and videos. In the inter- net age, hundreds of thousands of websites with close to 1 billion individual pages portray every imaginable type of sexual behavior. PornHub, just a single website, reported 28.5 billion visits to its site in 2017, which comes to 81 mil- lion visits a day. Analysts estimate that about one-third of all internet content is pornography (Castleman, 2016).

Pornography is certainly a case of “naked capitalism.” Reports suggest that the pornography industry generates $10 to $15 billion annually, which is more revenue than all sports franchises combined and exceeds the economic out- put of some countries (The Economist, 2015).

What Are the Effects of Viewing Pornography? There is little doubt that the consumption of pornography is high. Survey data suggest that more than half of U.S. men between the ages of eighteen and thirty and about 20 per- cent of women in this age range view pornography at least weekly. The share is even higher among young people in their teens and early twenties. One study found that, by the beginning of college, 90 percent of males and one-third of females reported viewing pornography (Orenstein, 2016).

As porn has become a significant part of popular cul- ture, researchers are beginning to study its effects. Few people claim that pornography is beneficial, although some point out that pornography serves as a source of information about sexuality that can inform young people who are curious as they begin to engage in sexual activity.

However, an increasing number of people are voicing concern, suggesting that a steady diet of pornography— especially by young men—can be harmful. Researchers are focusing on young people because evidence suggests that viewing pornography can distort sexual development. That is, young people whose brains have not fully developed learn patterns of sexual responsiveness from pornography. Young people learn to respond to the sexual stimulation they experience, which is to say, the ever-changing images they see on a screen. When pornography trains the brain in this way, people may have difficulty responding sexu- ally to real-life partners. In some cases, researchers report, people interacting with sexual partners are able to achieve sexual arousal only by engaging in fantasy about pornog- raphy. In a few cases, evidence suggests, heavy users of

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 149

is now being done on this topic, and early evidence sug- gests both that pornography may be linked to issues of sexual development and that it commonly presents sex in ways that are demeaning to women. And political oppo- sition to pornography exists across the political spectrum, with conservatives who object to sexually explicit material on moral grounds and liberals and feminists objecting to pornography as harmful to women.

Sexual Harassment Sexual violence ranges from verbal abuse to rape and other examples of forced sex that harms both women and men. Especially in the last few years, U.S. society has started to face up to one widespread type of sexual violence: sexual harassment, unwanted comments, gestures, requests, or phys- ical contact of a sexual nature. According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, simple teasing or offhand comments do not necessarily rise to the level of sexual harassment. But any behavior is illegal harassment if it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision.

In the television show Mad Men, men working in a 1960s’ advertising agency routinely make advances toward the women working as secretaries, suggesting how com- mon what we now call sexual harassment was fifty years ago. In fact, sexual harassment was so much a part of our way of life that few men or women recognized this behav- ior as a social problem and fewer still spoke up about it.

During the 1960s, the situation gradually changed along with the rise of the women’s movement. In 1964, Congress passed the Civil Rights Act with the goal of protecting African Americans from employment discrim- ination. The women’s movement successfully lobbied to extend the bill to defend people disadvantaged not just by their race but also by their sex. Thus, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in the terms, condi- tions, and privileges of employment on the basis of race and also sex. In 1972, Congress declared that schools, col- leges, and universities follow this law by passing Title IX of the Higher Education Amendment, which banned sex discrimination in institutions receiving federal funds.

Congress then created the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to investigate com- plaints of racial or sexual discrimination. In 1976, in the case of Williams v. Saxbe, a federal court recognized sexual harassment as one type of illegal sex discrimination. This decision was an early step in the process of bringing sexual harassment to public attention.

Another important event that took place in 1991 was the confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas, who was nomi- nated by President George H. W. Bush to take a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court. During the confirmation hearing, Anita Hill, a lawyer and professor of law who had once worked for Judge

There is also widespread concern about the effects of pornography. Both conservatives and liberals object to por- nography although, as we now explain, they do so for dif- ferent reasons.

Conservatives: The Moral Issue Conservatives view sex as a moral issue, emphasizing the importance of personal responsibility and public decency. Therefore, they define pornography as a social problem because it threatens con- ventional morality. Pornography encourages lustful behav- ior, they say, which can become an addiction, as it has for millions of people in the United States. In addition, conser- vatives claim that pornography weakens a society’s moral fabric and may threaten the stability of marriage and fam- ily. Studies show, for example, that men who are sexually unfaithful to their partners are twice as likely as those who are faithful to view pornography (Castleman, 2016).

Less than half of adults in the United States (43 per- cent of men and 25 percent of women) say that they find pornography to be morally acceptable. The share that finds pornography acceptable varies according to age. Greater acceptance is found among young adults (eigh- teen to thirty-four years old), 49 percent of whom find pornography to be acceptable. Among middle-aged adults (thirty-five to fifty-four years old), that share drops to 28 percent. Among older adults (fifty-five and older), just 19 percent find pornography morally acceptable (Gallup, 2013, 2015). Most people, then, appear to share a conserva- tive concern about pornography on moral grounds.

Liberals: Issues of Freedom and Power Liberals are di- vided over whether to define pornography as a social problem. Some liberals believe that what material people choose to read or view is their own business. Therefore, without claiming that pornography is necessarily good, liberals defend freedom of expression and support peo- ple’s right to privacy. Liberals who share this position have been outspoken in defending government funding of the arts, including artists whose work may attract criticism as violating community standards of decency.

Although some liberals defend pornography on the grounds of protecting free speech, a growing number of feminist liberals object to pornography as demeaning to women. They see pornography as a power issue, noting that sexually explicit material typically depicts women as the playthings of men (MacKinnon, 2001). Recent research supports this concern. Analysis of randomly selected scenes in readily available pornography showed that about 90 percent of these sexual situations contained some male physical aggression directed at women. Just as important, women responded to this aggression either without com- plaint or by expressing pleasure (Orenstein, 2016).

In sum, a majority of U.S. adults have concerns about sexually explicit material, and there is increasing discus- sion of the consequences of viewing pornography. Research

150 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

47 percent of all students claimed that they were victims of sexual harassment at some point while enrolled at their university. Among undergraduate women, 61 percent made this claim. Finally, 75 percent of LGBTQ students reported having experienced sexual harassment. The most common type of harassment was inappropriate comments about a person’s body, appearance, or sexuality followed by sexual remarks or comments including offensive stories or jokes (Cantor et al., 2015).

Who Harasses Whom? A Court Case The fact that men hold  most positions of power in U.S. society helps explain why 83 percent of known cases of harassment involve men harassing women (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2017). But not all harassment follows this pat- tern. In Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services (1998), the U.S. Supreme Court stated that a person can be sexually harassed by someone of either sex. In the Oncale case, after male co- workers threatened a married man with rape, he reported the incident to his supervisor. When the company did not respond to the report, the man quit his job and filed a lawsuit against the company. This case shows us that in some circumstances, men sexually harass other men who do not display what harassers think of as typical masculine behavior. In this situa- tion, sexual harassment was a form of control used by men to force others to conform to gender stereotypes (Lee, 2000).

Must Harassment Harm Victims? Other Court Cases Does sexual harassment exist only when a victim suffers clear and obvious harm? In 1998, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed this question. In one case, Ellerth v. Burlington

Industries, a woman complained that her supervisor made sexual advances in which he threatened that he could make her job easy or difficult, depending on whether she “loosened up.” Although she resisted his advances, she did not report the behavior, and there was no evidence that her career had been harmed. Soon after, however, she quit her job and then filed suit, claiming she was a victim of sexual harassment.

In a second case, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton, three women who worked as lifeguards in that Florida city claimed their supervisors for years had created a hos- tile workplace environment, engaging in sexual comments and physical touching. Their employer, the city of Boca Raton, had a sexual harassment policy in place, but no one had informed the women of the pol- icy. Subsequently, the women filed a law- suit against the city, charging that they had been harassed on the job.

Thomas, accused him of sexual harassment— specifically, of making unwanted sexual comments to her in the course of their work. Thomas was narrowly confirmed and the contro- versy made sexual harassment a household term.

In 2017, as described in the chapter-opening story, sex- ual harassment became a major social problem as a result of widespread allegations against numerous powerful men— including producers and actors in Hollywood, journalists in the media, and political leaders in state government, Congress, and the White House (Almukhtar, Gold, & Buchanan, 2018).

The EEOC recognizes two types of sexual harass- ment. The first is quid pro quo (Latin, meaning “one thing for another”) harassment, in which a person directs sexual advances or requests for sexual favors to an employee or other subordinate as a condition of employment or advancement. In this case, a boss might demand or imply that an employee is unlikely to receive a promotion unless she agrees to engage in a sexual relationship. The second type of harassment is more subtle behavior—including telling sexual jokes, display- ing nude photos, engaging in unnecessary touching, or offer- ing compliments on someone’s good looks—that the offender may not intend to be harassing. But the law is concerned with not just an offender’s intent but also with the effect of the behavior. Under the law, any behavior can be considered to be harassment, regardless of the actor’s intent, if the behavior has the effect of creating a hostile environment. The point of the law is to protect people who are trying to do their jobs from having unwanted sexual attention imposed on them (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2016).

Sexual harassment also occurs on the campus. Research carried out in 2015 on twenty-seven campuses found that

Prostitution is another issue that brings together conservatives and liberals. From a conservative point of view, prostitution violates traditional moral standards. Many liberals, and especially feminists, object to prostitution as the exploitation of women. Which political approach is illustrated in this protest against the sex tourism industry in Kiev, Ukraine?

S er

ge i S

up in

sk y/

A FP

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 151

In considering the two cases, the Supreme Court ruled that employees can be victims of harassment even if they were not obviously harmed by, say, losing out on a promo- tion. The Court also stated that employers are responsible when a supervisor harasses another employee, even if the company was not aware of the behavior, unless the com- pany can demonstrate that it had a well-publicized sexual harassment policy in place and that the employee knew about the policy but chose not to use it.

Prostitution The cultural ideal of sex involves physical and emotional intimacy between two people. Therefore, although it may well be the “world’s oldest profession,” prostitution, the selling of sexual services, has always been controversial. Offering to sell or to buy sexual services is against the law everywhere in the United States except in parts of rural Nevada.

Legal or not, prostitution is common. There is no accu- rate count of the number of people who work as prosti- tutes in the United States, but in national surveys about

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Prostitutes and Johns in Sweden: Who is Breaking the Law? Just about everywhere in the United States, it is against the law to sell sex. This means that when they work, prostitutes break the law. It is also against the law to buy sex. This means that when they solicit sex, “johns” also break the law. Legally, both men and women in the sex trade are at risk of arrest. In reality, however, two of three arrests involving sex for money involve women working as prostitutes. In most cases, police leave “johns” alone. Such a policy, in effect, defines the prostitution problem as women selling sex.

Sweden has a different approach to prostitution. For several decades, prostitution was legal in Sweden. Then, in 1999, that country passed a law that allows people to sell sex but makes it a crime to buy sex. As one of Sweden’s police officials recently put it, “We don’t have a problem with prostitutes. We have a problem with men who buy sex.”

The government’s policy is guided by feminist theory, which claims that prostitution is a form of male violence against women. In addition, the Swedish government explains, equality between the sexes can only be achieved when men do not exploit women in sexual ways. As for women, the law removed the risk of being arrested for selling sex and put into place a wide range of social services available to women who wish to stop working in prostitution.

Critics of the new policy claim that this law encourages men cruising for sex to get women into a car quickly, a practice that gives women little opportunity to assess any possible danger. In addition, the law has relocated most prostitution from visible

city streets to the outskirts of town where women may be more vulnerable to violence. But almost everyone agrees that, under the new law, the number of women working as prostitutes has fallen by as much as half. In Stockholm, the capital, estimates suggest that prostitution is down 80 percent. Just as important, before the law was enacted, thousands of women were brought into the country each year to work as prostitutes. Since the law took effect, cases of sex trafficking have declined to just a few hundred annually.

Most Swedes support the current law. Compared with the United States, where women working as prostitutes experience a revolving door of arrest followed by a return to working the streets, Sweden appears to have largely ended the problem by replacing the “male” policy of arresting women for selling sex with a “female” viewpoint of helping women get out of prostitution and arresting men who buy sex (Women’s Justice Center, 2009; Bramham, 2016).

What Do You Think? 1. How does the Swedish policy on prostitution differ from that

in the United States in terms of constructing the problem and defining the solution?

2. Do you think the United States is likely to adopt the Swedish policy? Why or why not?

3. Would you personally support the United States adopting the Swedish policy? Why or why not?

12 percent of adult men (and just a very small share of women) say that they have paid someone for sex or have been paid for sex at least once (Moore, 2016). In global perspective, prostitution is most common in low-income nations, where women’s economic opportunities are most limited.

One high-income country stands out as having a suc- cessful record of reducing prostitution. The surprising solution is simpler than you might expect, as the Social Problems in Global Perspective box explains.

Prostitutes: A Profile Most prostitutes—many prefer to call themselves “sex workers”—are women. But they are a diverse category, with better or worse working conditions depending on their degree of physical attractiveness, age, and social class position.

The most advantaged prostitutes are call girls, who arrange appointments with clients by text messaging or telephone. Typically, these women are young, attractive, and well educated, and they are also highly paid. Most call girls work independently rather than for a manager. Many advertise their services online or in the classified

152 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

of their earnings to managers, or pimps, who control their lives. With little ability to choose their customers, street- walkers are at high risk of violence and other abuse as well as for acquiring and spreading sexually transmitted dis- eases. Researchers estimate that the majority of streetwalk- ers have histories as victims of rape, incest, or other forms of sexual abuse, often going back to childhood (Estes, 2001; Williamson & Cluse-Tolar, 2002).

Prostitutes typically offer the sexual service requested by the client. Research suggests that the most common sex- ual act performed by prostitutes is oral sex, followed by sexual intercourse (Monto, 2001).

What about men who work as prostitutes? About 10 percent of prostitutes in the United States are men, and

ads of big-city newspapers, typically calling themselves “escorts,” which is a polite way of saying they offer an eve- ning of charming company, gracious conversation, and, for an additional fee, sex.

Less well-off are prostitutes who work in brothels or “massage parlors” or for large “escort services.” These women are employees who must follow the direction of their superiors. In addition, most of these women turn over at least half their earnings to their employer.

The worst-off—and the most numerous—of all prosti- tutes are streetwalkers. These people work the streets, offering sex to drive-by “johns.” Streetwalkers are mostly lower-class women, and they earn the least money. Although some of these women work on their own, they typically give most

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Children and Sex Tourism “On this trip, I had sex with a fourteen-year-old girl in Mexico and a fifteen-year-old in Colombia. I am helping them financially. If they don’t have sex with me, they may not have enough food.”

These words were spoken by a retired U.S. schoolteacher who had just returned from a “vacation” in Latin America, where he was part of the global sex tourism business.

We live in a world made ever smaller by faster and less expensive transportation. In the past fifty years, the number of people traveling all over the world has increased tenfold. But a troubling side of this trend is an increasing number of men from high-income countries who travel to low-income nations with the goal of having sex with children.

Sex tourism is big business. Although there are no exact figures, it is likely that about 10 percent of the gross domestic product of several Southeast Asian countries—including Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand—comes from sex tourism. Sex tourism is also increasing in Africa, Eastern Europe, and Latin America. Around the world, perhaps 1 million children are selling sex.

What accounts for the high level of sex tourism? One underlying cause is poverty. Sex tourism is most widespread in countries where the average person is very poor. With little economic opportunity, families are willing to allow their children to go to work, in many cases turning children over to “agents” who promise to find them jobs.

Gender stratification is also at work here. Most low- income countries are patriarchal, and boys get more schooling than girls do. This means that parents who need money may send their daughters off to work with many ending up in the sex trade.

A final factor that has increased sex tourism in recent decades is the spread of the internet. Not only do millions of men travel to have sex with children, but many of them share their experiences, posting detailed accounts on thousands of websites that attract even more people into the global sex trade.

The plight of children working as prostitutes is tragic and can be shocking. Estimates suggest that most children have at least 100 and as many as 1,500 clients annually (the higher number would be almost five clients a day, working all year). Beyond being forced to have sex, these children face violence from clients and employers and fear of arrest by the police and run a high risk of getting sexually transmitted diseases. Within months of going to work as prostitutes, most young children become depressed, lose their self-esteem, and view their situation as hopeless. Drug use and even suicide are common (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).

In response to increasing sex tourism, many national governments are calling for an end to child prostitution and a full-scale assault on the entire sex tourism industry. In the United States, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has launched “Operation Predator” and has successfully prosecuted thousands of people for violating a 2003 law that bans traveling to engage in sex offenses involving children. But given the severe poverty that is widespread in many countries, not to mention the added problem of police corruption, great change is unlikely any time soon.

What Do You Think? 1. Many men who take part in sex tourism make excuses for

their behavior, as we read at the beginning of this box. Can you think of ways to discourage men from high-income countries from traveling to have sex with children?

2. Some travelers feel that the social norms we recognize at home do not apply in foreign lands, so sex with children is somehow OK. Do you think people everywhere should declare sex tourism a “universal wrong”? Why or why not?

3. Children also sell sex in the United States. Have you heard of this practice, which has been documented at truck stops as well as business conventions? How do you explain this happening in high-income countries like our own?

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 153

almost all sell sex to other men. They, too, are a diverse category, ranging from well-paid “escorts” to young run- aways trying to survive from day to day on the streets (Boyer, 1989; Strong & DeVault, 1994).

Arrests for Prostitution Although prostitution is against the law almost everywhere in the United States, law enforcement is selective. About two-thirds of roughly 32,000 people arrested for prostitution in 2015 were women; the remaining one-third were men, including both male prostitutes and “johns” or male clients. In gen- eral, arrests involve women working the streets. In prac- tice, then, the risk of arrest is greatest for poor women and women of color (Justice, 2016).

Should police and the courts get tougher in cases involving prostitution? Surveys suggest that the U.S. popu- lation is divided on this issue. In a recent survey, 40 percent of adults said they thought the sale of sex between con- senting adults should be legal; 43 percent said it should not be legal. Notice, however, a sharp difference in attitude by gender: 51 percent of men support legal prostitution and just 30 percent of women say the same (Crockett, 2016).

Of course, much prostitution is driven by desperation and cannot be considered to be “consenting.” In addition, health risks include the danger of spreading sexually trans- mitted diseases, including AIDS. Finally, it is likely that there would be even less tolerance for prostitution if the public were aware of the extent of violence and the drug abuse that often accompany this way of life.

Child Prostitution and Sex Trafficking Few people defend prostitution when it involves children. Around the world, hundreds of thousands of children (most of them boys) live on the streets, and many sell sex to survive. Some of these children work to provide income for their families; others were orphaned by AIDS or war. Almost all are desperately poor (ECPAT International, 2018).

Prostitution is linked to sex trafficking, which is the forced movement and trade in women and children for sexual exploitation. Estimates suggest that some 20 million people, including 2 million children, are victimized in this way. The reason is financial profit: This criminal activity earns close to $100 billion each year (Equality Now, 2018).

Many people travel to lower-income nations to engage in sex tourism. The Southeast Asian nation of Thailand has become a center for the global sex tourism industry, where the number of prostitutes may be as high as 125,000. In countless brothels and sex shows on the streets of Bangkok, Thailand’s capital city, half the women who are selling sex are not yet out of their teens (UNAIDS, 2013).

Why are child prostitutes so popular? Customers favor young women in the belief that they pose less risk of spreading AIDS. But the fact is that girls and women working as prostitutes are at high risk for AIDS and other

sexually transmitted diseases. The share of sex work- ers with HIV has been declining, but the threat is real. In addition, many of these girls and women also suffer from other medical conditions caused by years of neglect and abuse (Renton, 2005; UNAIDS, 2011). The Social Problems in Global Perspective box takes a closer look at sex tourism involving children.

Teenage Pregnancy and Parenthood In the United States there are about 21 million girls ages ten to nineteen, and about 230,000 of these young women gave birth in 2015 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017). Most did not plan the pregnancy, and neither did the young men they were involved with. More seriously, most of these young people are unprepared to face the responsi- bilities of parenthood. The number of teenagers who become pregnant has been declining over the past decade. Even so, as Figure 5–4 shows, the rate of teenage births is much higher in the United States than in other high-income nations.

Looking back fifty years, we see that the share of teens that became pregnant is far lower. Back then, cultural norms led people to marry at a younger age, and most teens who became pregnant were young wives who, with their husbands, were starting families and wanted chil- dren. In the 1950s, there was widespread disapproval of having an “illegitimate” child, so many unmarried couples

0

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

B ir

th s

to W

o m

en A

ge s

15 t

o 1

9, 2

01 5–

20 20

(P er

1 ,0

00 W

o m

en A

ge s

15 t

o 1

9)

20

192

18.8 12.5 9.4 8.6 5.2 4.1

169.1

64.5 60.3

47.4

Ja pan

Swed en

Can ad

a

Fr an

ce

Unite d K

in gdom

Unite d S

ta te

s

In dones

ia

M ex

icoM ali

Afg han

ist an

Nig er

Global Snapshot Figure 5–4 Births to Teenage Women

The share of women between the ages of fifteen and nineteen who have given birth is much higher in low-income nations than it is in high-income countries. Among the high-income nations, however, the United States stands out as having a higher share of young women who gave birth.

SOURCE: United Nations Population Division (2017).

154 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

hardships with little or no help from their fathers. Not sur- prisingly, these children grow up at high risk for becoming single parents themselves.

Sex Education: A Solution? What can society do to reduce unwanted teen pregnancy? One strategy looks to schools. Sex education programs teach young people how their bodies grow and change, present the biology of repro- duction, and explain how to avoid pregnancy by using birth control or abstaining from sex.

Today, in most public schools, “sex ed” is an estab- lished part of the curriculum. Yet this program remains controversial. Critics (typically conservatives) point to what they see as a troubling pattern: Over many decades since schools first adopted sex education programs, the level of sexual activity among teenagers is now higher. Researchers tell us that, by their senior year, 58 percent of today’s high school students have had sexual intercourse. Of course, such data do not prove that the cause of this change is sex education. But to some people (especially conservatives) sex education is part of the problem just as to others (typically liberals) it is part of the solution.

Supporters of sex education say that the biggest cause of teenage pregnancy is ignorance. It makes sense, they say, to teach young people—many of whom are sexually active—about birth control methods and the risks of con- tracting sexually transmitted diseases. From this point of view, sex education is the main reason for the recent decline in unwanted teenage pregnancy.

Perhaps no sex education issue provokes more heated discussion than the policy of distributing condoms in school. Conservatives claim that this policy only encourages young people to rush headlong into sexual activity. Liberals respond that most young people will be sexually active one way or another; the point is to give them the knowledge and technology they need to avoid pregnancy and sexu- ally transmitted diseases (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2017; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017).

Finally, the mass media have a powerful effect on the attitudes and behavior of young people. Over the last decade, television shows including 16 and Pregnant, Teen Mom, and Teen Mom 2 have shown the reality of young motherhood. The viewing public may have picked up the message. Researchers note that, in the years after this pro- gramming began, the teen pregnancy rate in the United States fell significantly, suggesting that the programs may have changed some people’s behavior (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2014).

Abortion Of all the issues surrounding sexuality in the United States, surely the most controversial is abortion, the intentional termination of a pregnancy. Each year in the United States,

who learned they were expecting a baby married quickly (the so-called “shotgun wedding,” often at the insistence of the woman’s father). In other cases, the woman quietly moved away and, after the birth, put the child up for adop- tion. A few women obtained abortions, but this practice was against the law almost everywhere.

Today, most of the young women who become preg- nant are not married. Few teenage girls who become preg- nant rush to get married, and few put their babies up for adoption. One research project painted this picture: Of all pregnant teens, 15 percent had miscarriages, 26 percent had abortions, and the majority (59 percent) kept their babies (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2014).

One major reason that the pregnancy rate among girls in their teens has been declining is that there has been a decline in the share of teens who are sexually active. A sec- ond reason for the decline is increased use of contracep- tives among teens who are sexually active.

The risk of unwanted pregnancy is greatest among girls who may be biologically mature but do not under- stand how their reproductive systems work. Girls lack- ing this knowledge are likely to be from poor families. Compared with those from richer families, these girls are also more likely to keep their babies. Why? Researchers point out that most low-income girls and boys think that attending college and finding a good career is simply out of their reach. As a result, having a baby—becoming a parent—may seem to be the only way these young peo- ple can claim social standing as adults. Single motherhood is particularly common among poor African Americans, who are doubly disadvantaged by poverty and racism. For all racial and ethnic categories, becoming an unmarried teenage mother makes it harder to finish school and find a good job, dramatically increasing the odds of remaining poor (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2014; Curtin, Abma, & Kost, 2015). National Map 5–1 shows the rate of teenage pregnancy across the United States.

The Costs of Teenage Pregnancy At its best, parenthood is a source of great joy. But for men and women who are young and poor, parenthood can bring a level of respon- sibility and economic pressure that they simply cannot handle. Many look to government for help, and the cost of income assistance, medical care, and other support for preg- nant teenagers in the United States is about $9.4 billion each year (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017).

The greatest burden of poverty, however, is borne by those who understand none of this—the babies. On aver- age, infants born to poor teens have lower birth weight and higher risk of physical and developmental problems. Many such infants face a life of challenges brought on by poverty, including poor nutrition, violence in the local neighborhood, little schooling, and inadequate health care. To make matters worse, most of these children face these

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 155

time, legislators turned against this procedure regardless of who carried it out. By the early twentieth century, every state in the country had enacted a law banning abortion entirely (Luker, 1984).

These new laws did not end the practice of terminating pregnancy, however. Women with money could find a doc- tor willing to perform a safe abortion. But for poor women, it was another story. They either endured an unwanted pregnancy or submitted to an inexpensive “back alley” procedure performed by an unlicensed practitioner some- times with deadly results.

By the 1960s, all across the United States, a social move- ment was under way to repeal laws banning abortion. In 1973, the movement succeeded when the U.S. Supreme Court issued decisions in the cases of Roe v. Wade and Doe v. Bolton, which struck down all state abortion laws. Ever since, “pro-choice” people (typically liberals) have fought to keep abortion available to women. “Antiabortion” peo- ple (typically conservatives) are working just as hard to limit abortion and even to reverse the Supreme Court deci- sion and once again make abortion illegal.

slightly less than 1 million abortions are performed, which represents about one-fifth of all pregnancies. The typical woman receiving an abortion is in her twenties, and about half of these women have had one or more abortions before. Data show that 86 percent are unmarried, and 49 percent have income below the poverty line. Finally, 39 percent of the women are white, and 52 percent are African American or Hispanic American (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2017).

Abortion: A Look Back Abortion goes far back in history; this practice was common among the ancient Egyptians, Romans, and Greeks (Luker, 1984; Tannahill, 1992). In the United States, from the colonial era until the mid- nineteenth century, early-term abortion by midwives and other traditional practitioners was legal everywhere. The picture began to change in 1847, when the newly formed American Medical Association (AMA) pressed to outlaw the procedure. The AMA claimed that only medical doc- tors were qualified to perform abortions; the AMA was clearly trying to put midwives and other traditional heal- ers who performed abortions out of business. But over

In Tucson, Arizona, 18-year-old Ramona Ramirez was just given a baby shower by her high school classmates, many of whom are already married and have children.

In Bangor, Maine, Sandy Johnson, also 18, reports that only “one or two” girls in her high school have become pregnant.

Pregnancies per 1,000 Women Ages 15 to 19

Very High 60 and higher

Above Average 50259

Average 40249

Below Average 30239

Very Low 29 and lower

LOUISIANA

HAWAII

ALASKA

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS

MISSOURI

TEXAS

IOWA

MINNESOTA

UTAH

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C. DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINE

VERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

WEST VIRGINIA

INDIANA

Seeing Ourselves National Map 5–1 Teenage Pregnancy Rates across the United States

The map shows pregnancy rates for women ages fifteen to nineteen across the United States. What can you say about the regions of the country where rates are high? Where they are low? Can you explain these patterns?

SOURCE: Alan Guttmacher Institute (2017).

156 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

and fifty-seven of these bills were passed in seventeen states (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2016; Gold & Nash, 2017).

The election of Donald Trump, who campaigned on the promise to appoint “pro-life judges,” raises questions about the future of the nation’s abortion laws (Suddath, 2017). As of 2018, there is no clear indication that the U.S. Supreme Court is likely to overturn the Roe v. Wade decision any time soon. Any such decision would be a massive setback for women’s reproductive rights in the United States. If this were to happen, control of abortion policy would go back to individual states. Currently, seven states have enacted laws that would keep abortion available if Roe were overturned. But twenty states have laws that would restrict or ban legal access to abortion (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2016).

Where does the public stand on the issue of abortion? People’s attitudes about abortion depend on why the pro- cedure takes place. Table 5–1 shows the proportion of U.S. adults who support abortion under various circumstances. A large majority (85.2 percent) support legal abortion if a woman’s health is threatened by her pregnancy; however, less than half (44.3 percent) support legal abortion for any reason at all (Smith et al., 2017). Surprisingly, perhaps, sup- port for abortion is about the same among men (55 percent) as it is among women (59 percent). As you might expect, support for abortion is greater among Democrats (75 per- cent) than among Republicans (34 percent). In addition, attitudes toward abortion vary by race and ethnicity. For example, people of Arab and Italian descent are more con- servative on this issue, with only 29 percent supporting abortion for any reason. At the liberal end of the political spectrum, 89 percent of Jewish Americans support abor- tion in most or all cases (Pew Research Center, 2015, 2017).

Why is the abortion controversy so intense? From anyone’s point of view, a lot is at stake. Antiabortion activ- ists claim that abortion is nothing less than the killing of unborn children. On matters of life and death, many people will not compromise their beliefs. Yet pro-choice activists, too, have reason to stand firm. As they see it, legal access to abortion is the key to women’s control over childbear- ing and therefore women’s control over their lives. Only by avoiding unwanted pregnancy can women have the opportunity to earn income and establish their indepen- dence from men. In short, without legal abortion, women are unlikely ever to achieve social equality with men.

Sexually Transmitted Infections Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are infections spread by sexual contact. In all, there are more than fifty STIs. The rates of most STIs—including gonorrhea, syphilis, and genital herpes—began to rise during the sexual revolution of the 1960s. By the 1980s, the increasing danger of STIs played a part in encouraging the sexual counterrevolution, described earlier in this chapter.

The Abortion Controversy Today Since 1973, various laws and court decisions have reduced women’s access to abortion. In 1977, for example, Congress passed the Hyde Amendment prohibiting the use of Medicaid funds for abortions, except when necessary to save the life of the mother. In 1980, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Harris v. McRae that state and federal governments need not pro- vide poor women with taxpayer-funded abortions. In 1989, the Supreme Court upheld a state law that banned public employees or medical personnel working in public facil- ities from performing abortions, except to save the moth- er’s life. In Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989), the Court also upheld state laws that require doctors, before performing an abortion, to conduct medical tests to see whether the fetus could survive outside the mother’s body.

In 1992, the Court’s decision in Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey reaffirmed that states had wide latitude in setting abortion policy. Later in the 1990s, Congress twice proposed laws banning so-called partial-birth abortions performed in the third trimester of pregnancy, but President Clinton vetoed both bills. Finally, numerous state laws have been enacted to limit access to abortion. Typically, advocates of these laws claim the laws protect women’s health. Opponents see the laws (which they sometimes label as TRAP laws, meaning “targeted regulation of abortion pro- vider”) as barriers to limit abortion rights. These laws take a number of forms. By 2018, forty-three states had enacted laws that ban abortion after a specified point in a woman’s pregnancy. In addition, thirty-seven states (most are in the South and Midwest) have enacted laws requiring some parental involvement in a minor’s decision to have an abor- tion, including twenty-six states that require one or both par- ents to consent to the procedure (Alan Guttmacher Institute, 2018). In 2015, lawmakers in forty-six states considered 396 proposals that had the effect of restricting abortion access,

Table 5–1 U.S. Attitudes toward Abortion

Survey Question: “It should be possible for a woman to obtain a legal abortion . . .”

SOURCE: Smith et al. (2017).

Percentage Answering Yes

“. . . if the woman’s own health is seriously endangered by the pregnancy.”

85.2%

“. . . if she becomes pregnant as a result of rape.”

74.6

“. . . if there is a strong chance of a seri- ous defect in the baby.”

71.6

“. . . if she is married and does not want any more children.”

45.4

“. . . if the family has a very low income and cannot afford any more children.”

43.2

“. . . for any reason.” 44.3

“. . . if she is not married and does not want to marry the man.”

41.4

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 157

AIDS The most serious of all sexually transmitted infec- tions is acquired immune deficiency syndrome, or AIDS. Soon after identifying this infection in 1981, doctors concluded that it is incurable and, if untreated, is usually fatal. AIDS is caused by the human immunodeficiency virus, or HIV, which destroys the body’s immune system. AIDS itself does not kill; it makes a person unable to fight off a wide range of other diseases that eventually cause death.

Extent of the AIDS Problem in the United States Govern- ment officials recorded 6,719 deaths due to HIV/AIDS in the United States in 2014. Officials also noted 39,513 new HIV cases in 2015. The number of cases reported each year has been decreasing. Since 1981, the official count of people who have contracted AIDS stands at 1,232,346. Of these, more than 650,000 have died (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017).

Non-Hispanic white people (61.3 percent of the popu- lation) account for 5.2 percent of patients with HIV; Latinos (17.8 percent of the U.S. population) account for 17 per- cent of people with HIV. Asian Americans (5.5 percent of the population) and Native Americans (8.5 percent of the population) together represent 14 percent of people with HIV. Non-Hispanic African Americans (13.3 percent of the population) account for 43.6 percent of people with HIV. In short, minorities—and especially African Americans— are at relatively high risk of HIV infection. This pattern is especially true among women: About 79 percent of women

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2017) reports about 20 million new sexu- ally transmitted infections each year. About half of the people infected are younger than twenty-five. Overall, the CDC estimates the number of sexually transmitted infections (both new and existing) in the United States at 110 million, and about $16 billion annually is spent treating them. The following sec- tions briefly describe several common sexually trans- mitted infections.

Gonorrhea and Syphilis Gonorrhea and syphilis, among the oldest infections to afflict humans, result from microscopic organisms typically transmitted during sexual activity. Untreated, gonorrhea can cause sterility; syphilis can result in blindness, mental disor- ders, and even death.

In 2016, the official record showed 468,514 cases of gonorrhea and 27,814 cases of syphilis in the United States, although the actual totals were probably much higher. Official data showed that half of all cases of gonorrhea involved African Americans (51 percent), with lower numbers reported among non-Hispanic whites (30 percent), Latinos (15 percent), and Asian Americans, Native Americans, and multiracial people (about 1 percent each) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (2017).

Doctors treat gonorrhea and syphilis effectively with antibiotics, such as penicillin. For this reason, assuming treatment is available, neither disease is considered a major U.S. health problem today.

Genital Herpes Genital herpes (herpes simplex virus, type 2) is a virus that infects at least 25 million people, or about one in six people (16 percent) in the United States between the ages of fourteen and forty-nine. Among peo- ple in their forties, about one in four is infected with the genital herpes virus. In this age category, the rate of infec- tion is more than twice as high among African Americans (56 percent) than among non-Hispanic whites (21 percent) and Hispanic Americans (20 percent) (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2016).

Although herpes poses less danger to human health than gonorrhea and syphilis, it is an infection that has no cure. Some people with genital herpes have no symp- toms at all, and many are unaware that they are infected with the virus. Others, however, experience periodic, painful blisters on the genitals accompanied by fever and headache.

One serious concern is that women with active genital herpes can transmit the disease to infants during vaginal delivery, and it can be deadly to a newborn. Therefore, doc- tors usually advise infected women to give birth by cesar- ean section.

Healthy sexual relationships mean that people do not engage in sex when there is danger of transmitting an infection. Healthy sexual relationships also require the consent of participants. Good decision-making and consent require that partners not be impaired by alcohol or any other drug.

Im ag

e S

ou rc

e/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

158 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

boys because HIV is more easily transmitted from males to females than the other way around (UNAIDS, 2017).

How HIV Progresses and Is Transmitted People who be- come infected with HIV may display flu-like symptoms within a few weeks of their infection, but some will have no symptoms for a year or even longer. Therefore, most people with the virus remain unaware of their condition and may unknowingly spread the disease. Without treatment, peo- ple with AIDS may survive for only three or four years. But antiretroviral therapy (ART) can slow or prevent the de- velopment of AIDS in people infected with HIV, especially if treatment is started soon after infection. This treatment is the main reason that the annual number of deaths from AIDS has decreased by about half in the last ten years.

Although HIV is infectious, it is not contagious. This means that HIV is transmitted from person to person in

and children with HIV are Latinas or African Americans (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017).

Extent of the AIDS Problem in the World In many regions of the world, AIDS is a medical catastrophe. Just how great is the global toll? Around the world, HIV infects some 36.7 million people, 2.1 million of whom are under the age of fifteen. Although new treatments are extending more lives, this number of infections continues to increase. Global Map 5–1 shows that the countries with the highest rates of HIV infections are in sub-Saharan Africa, which accounts for 64 percent of the world’s cases. According to the United Nations, in much of this region, 1.9 percent of young men (fifteen to twenty-four years of age) are infect- ed with HIV as are 3.3 percent of young women. In these African nations, because heterosexual relations are the main way HIV is transmitted, girls are at higher risk than

ANTARCTICA

30° 30°

30°

0°30° 30°60°90°

120°150°

60° 90° 120° 150°

30°

0° 0°

EUROPE

20°20° 40°

60°

40°

0°

Percentage of Population Ages 15 to 49 with HIV/AIDS

World average: 0.8%

10.0% and greater

5.0% to 9.9%

1.0% to 4.9%

0.1% to 0.9%

Less than 0.1%

No data

Area of inset

Greenland (Den.)

Western Sahara (Mor.)

Hong Kong

Macao

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

Taiwan

Singapore

West Bank

Puerto Rico (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

VANUATU

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

SOLOMON ISLANDS

PAPUA NEW GUINEA

TIMOR-LESTE

VANUATU

PALAU

KIRIBATI

MARSHALL ISLANDS

FEDERATED STATES OF MICRONESIA

NAURU

JAPAN

NORTH KOREA SOUTH KOREA

MONGOLIA

KYRGYZSTAN

OMAN

CHINA

NEPAL BHUTAN

TAJIKISTAN

IRAN

MALAYSIA BRUNEI

I N D O N E S I A

CAMBODIA

SRI LANKA

VIETNAM PHILIPPINES

BANGLADESH LAOS

THAILAND

MAURITIUS

MADAGASCAR

SOUTH AFRICA LESOTHO

SWAZILAND

NAMIBIA

MOZAMBIQUE

MALDIVES

SEYCHELLES

COMOROSTANZANIA

SAO TOME & PRINCIPE

BURUNDI

KENYA

ANGOLA

GABON

REP. OF THE CONGO

EQ. GUINEA UGANDA CAM. SOMALIA

CENT. AFR. REP. ETHIOPIA

DJIBOUTI SUDAN

S. SUDAN

CHAD

KUWAIT

NIGER

BENIN

CÔTE D’IVOIRE TOGO

MAURITANIA MALI SENEGAL

GAMBIA GUINEA-BISSAU

GUINEA SIERRA LEONE

LIBERIA

BURKINA FASO NIGERIA

GHANA

CAPE VERDE

SAUDI ARABIA

EGYPT LIBYA

MOROCCO

U.A.E.

ALGERIA

ST. VINCENT & THE GRENADINES

BAHAMAS

TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

ANTIGUA & BARBUDA DOMINICA ST. LUCIA

BARBADOSGRENADA

GUYANA

SURINAME

CHILE

ECUADOR

PARAGUAY

ARGENTINA URUGUAY

PERU

HAITIJAMAICA

NICARAGUA

CUBA

DOM. REP.

GUATEMALA EL SALVADOR

BELIZE

HONDURAS

COSTA RICA PANAMA

COLOMBIA

BOLIVIA

VENEZUELA

U.S.

U.S.

JORDAN

IRAQ

BAHRAIN QATAR

ISRAEL LEBANON SYRIA

AZERBAIJAN ARMENIA

GEORGIA

TUNISIA

RWANDA

DEM. REP. OF THE CONGO

ERITREA

ST. KITTS & NEVIS

UNITED STATES

MEXICO

BRAZIL

CANADA RUSSIA

KAZAKHSTAN

UZBEKISTAN

TURKMENISTAN

AFGHANISTAN

YEMEN

PAKISTAN

MYANMAR (BURMA)

ICELAND

SPAIN

NORWAY

IRELAND

UNITED KINGDOM

DENMARK

POLANDGERMANY NETH.

BEL.

LUX. AUS.

CZECH REP.

PORTUGAL

SWITZ.

ITALY

FRANCE SLO. CROATIA

BOS. & HERZ.

FINLANDSWEDEN

ROMANIA HUNG.

SERBIA

SLVK.

ESTONIA

LATVIA LITHUANIA

UKRAINE

MOLDOVA

BELARUS

ALB.

BULGARIA MAC.

GREECE

MONT. KOS.

RUSSIA

TURKEY

MALTA CYPRUS

Parker Marsden goes to a small college in Minnesota; although aware of AIDS, he does not know anyone infected with HIV.

Mukoya Saarelma-Maunumaa lives in Botswana, where as many as half the people in some rural regions are infected with HIV; he has lost his father and two cousins to AIDS.

INDIA

BOTSWANA

ZIMBABWE

ZAMBIA MALAWI

Window on the World Global Map 5–1 HIV Infections in Global Perspective

The nations of sub-Saharan Africa contain 64 percent of the world’s cases of HIV and 68 percent of all new infections. Infection rates are fairly low in North and South America, which together account for 9 percent of global cases of HIV.

SOURCE: UNAIDS (2013, 2016).

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 159

mid-1980s, when transfusions spread HIV into the hetero- sexual population, officials gave the problem greater atten- tion and began screening the nation’s blood supply for HIV.

As the death toll mounted, the gay and lesbian commu- nities came together to begin outreach programs to encour- age safer sex and to explain what HIV is and how it is spread. These efforts succeeded as gay men began to reduce the number of sexual partners and avoid high-risk behaviors.

In recent years, new drug therapies have extended the lives of people with HIV. Antiretroviral therapy (ART) improves the health of people with HIV and can also pre- vent those people from further transmitting the virus. As the cost of such therapy has come down, this treatment has become more widely available in the United States and around the world. Globally, ART was reaching more than 20 million people in 2018 and the United Nations has set a target of treating 90 percent of people infected with HIV (some 32 million people) by 2020 (World Health Organization, 2015, 2017).

Theories of Sexuality 5.5 Apply sociological theory to issues involving

sexuality.

Sociological theory can help us understand various social problems more completely. The following sections look at sexuality using sociology’s major theoretical approaches.

only a few, specific ways: through blood, semen, or breast milk. It is not transmitted through casual contact such as shaking hands, hugging, sharing towels or dishes, swim- ming together, or even coughing or sneezing. The risk of transmitting the virus through saliva (as in kissing) is extremely low. One effective strategy to greatly reduce the risk of transmitting HIV through sexual activity is for males to use a latex condom. But the only sure way to stay safe from HIV is sexual abstinence or an exclusive relation- ship with an uninfected person.

Specific behaviors put people at high risk for HIV infection (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2017):

1. Anal sex. Anal intercourse is dangerous because it can cause rectal bleeding, which permits easy passage of HIV from one person to another. Because many ho- mosexual and bisexual men engage in anal sex, for the year 2016 these categories of people account for 67 per- cent of all HIV cases diagnosed.

2. Sharing needles. Injecting a drug using a needle that is shared with other people is a high-risk behavior because users come into contact with each other’s blood. In 2016, as a result of extensive education and prevention programs, intravenous drug users account for just 6 percent of people diagnosed with HIV—this represents a sharp decline from a decade ago. Even so, sex with an intravenous drug user remains a high-risk behavior. Because the rate of intravenous drug use is relatively high among poor people in the United States, AIDS increasingly has become a disease of the economically disadvantaged.

3. Using any drug. The use of any drug, including al- cohol, can put people at risk of acquiring any STI be- cause it harms a person’s judgment. Even people who understand the risks may act less responsibly if they are under the influence of alcohol, marijuana, or some other drug.

As Figure 5–5 shows, 30 percent of people with AIDS in the United States became infected through heterosexual contact. The risk goes up along with the number of sexual partners, especially if they fall into high-risk categories. Around the world, heterosexual activity accounts for two- thirds of all infections.

Combating AIDS In the early 1980s, the gay community was the first to call attention to the problem of AIDS. The government was slow to respond, perhaps because it was gay men who were most affected by the epidemic. Activists pressed for greater government funding for AIDS research and more social services for people with AIDS. By the

Homosexual sex, 55%

Injection/ drug use,

9%

Multiple exposure,

4%

Perinatal, 1% Other, 1%

Heterosexual sex, 30%

Figure 5–5 Types of Transmission for All Reported U.S. AIDS Cases from 1981 through 2016

More than half the people with AIDS in the United States were infected through homosexual activity. However, there are many ways to become infected.

SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2017).

160 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

The Functions of Prostitution If certain sexual relation- ships are defined as social problems, it is also true that some patterns widely viewed as “sexual problems” may not be entirely bad for everybody. Take the case of pros- titution. As explained earlier in this chapter, most people view prostitution as a problem because it spreads disease and exploits women (Smith et al., 2017). But as Kingsley Davis (1971) pointed out many years ago, prostitution also performs a few useful, if less noticed, functions.

According to Davis, prostitution is one way to meet the sexual needs of those members of a society who do not have ready access to sex, including soldiers and travelers as well as people who are for whatever reason unable to attract a partner. In addition, some people may favor pros- titution simply because they want sex without the commit- ment of a relationship. As the saying goes: “Men don’t pay for sex; they pay so they can leave.”

EVALUATE

Structural-functional theory explains the importance of sexuality in the organization of society and especially why societies have always paid attention to who reproduces with whom. At the same time, now that modern technology has largely separated sex from reproduction, does society need to regulate sex as much as it once did?

Structural-functional theory sometimes ignores gender. When Kingsley Davis wrote of the benefits of prostitution for society, he was really talking about benefits to some men. We might also ask whether prostitution would exist if women had the same economic opportunities as men. Another limitation of this approach is that it ignores the diversity of sexual norms in the United States as well as how much patterns of sexual behavior change over time. To appre- ciate the varied and changeable character of sexuality, we now turn to symbolic-interaction theory.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Applying structural-functional theory, why do societies control sexual behavior, especially when it involves reproduction? What is one limitation of this approach?

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining Sexuality Symbolic-interaction theory highlights the fact that members of a society socially construct sexuality just as they create all other aspects of reality. As human creations, the meanings people attach to sexuality can vary quite a bit. One good way to see the differ- ent views people have about sex is to look back in history.

The Meaning of Virginity A good example of the changing meanings attached to sex is the idea of vir- ginity, that is, the state of never having had sexual

Structural-Functional Analysis: Controlling Sexuality The most basic function of sexuality is human reproduction, which is the process that allows our species to exist. But con- trolling sexuality is also important to social organization, which is why society creates norms that guide members in the selection of partners and the process of reproduction. To see why controlling sexuality is important, imagine for a moment that people reproduced with just anybody. If this were to happen, the family as we know it would not exist, and kinship ties would become impossible to track. In such a chaotic state, no one would have clear obligations to anyone else, so that society as we know it would largely collapse.

Incest and Legitimacy One important norm guiding reproduction is the incest taboo, the norm found in every society that forbids sex and reproduction between certain close family members. The incest taboo is found all over the world, although exactly which kin are included varies from one society to another. Why is this norm important? Again, if close blood kin were to reproduce, social relation- ships would soon become hopelessly confusing. If a father and a daughter reproduced and had a son, for example, what would the boy’s relationship be to each of them?

In the same way, the traditional norms that defined as legitimate children born to married couples is a soci- etal strategy to ensure that children are cared for within established families and that they have legal ties, including rights of inheritance, to their biological parents. In short, structural-functional theory helps explain why societies try to control sexual relationships in various ways and why some types of relations, such as incest, are widely regarded as social problems in societies around the world.

Are chastity belts a thing of the past? In a clear case of society controlling sexuality, these women who work in massage parlors in one Indonesian city are required to wear padlocked trousers to prevent prostitution. Whose interests do you think are served by such a practice?

A m

an R

ah m

an /A

FP /G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 161

Defining Sexuality: The Transgender Movement This social movement provides another illustration of how meanings surrounding sexuality can change. As noted earlier in this chapter, the conventional understanding of sexuality was that humanity is divided into two dis- tinct categories: females and males. There was always the awareness that a tiny share of people had some combi- nation of female and male sex organs. But the common view of these individuals was that some biological error had resulted in an “exception” to the rule that sex is a clear, binary concept. In short, sexually speaking, the argument went that people were born “one way or the other.”

We now have a different view of human sexuality. In recent decades, mounting evidence from societies around the world shows that the binary view is, at best, simplistic and, at worst, quite harmful. For example, the account of the muxe in Mexico reveals that definitions of sexuality can and do extend beyond the boundaries of female and male categories. In addition, the transgender movement has demonstrated that many people seek to define sexual iden- tity for themselves. In 2017, California became the first state to legally permit people to designate their sexual identity in terms other than female and male by choosing the alter- native “X.” Similarly, an increasing number of states and cities have passed laws that allow people to choose bath- rooms based on their current sexual identity rather than an assignment made at birth.

In short, sexual identity is not a simple matter of two rigid concepts. It is far more complex and also reflects the choice of the individual.

EVALUATE

Symbolic-interaction theory highlights how people construct reality in their everyday lives, a process that applies to sexuality as it does to other forms of behavior. But although many aspects of sexuality vary over time and from place to place, some patterns are remark- ably consistent, such as men’s tendency to devalue women as sex objects. To understand this pattern, we turn to two important social-conflict theories.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What insights do we gain by applying symbolic-interaction theory to the issue of sexuality? What is one limitation of this approach?

Social-Conflict Analysis: Feminist Theory and Queer Theory Social-conflict theory highlights social inequality. Following this approach, feminist theory explains that sexuality reflects inequality between women and men. Similarly, queer theory highlights inequality between homosexuals and heterosexuals.

intercourse. Through most of this nation’s history, strong cultural norms demanded that people—or more precisely, women—remain virgins until marriage. Before modern methods of birth control were available, the norm of vir- ginity was the only way men could be sure they were not marrying a woman who was carrying another man’s child.

The development of effective birth control gradually separated sexuality from reproduction, so virginity lost much of its earlier significance. One study shows that among people born in the decade after 1963, fully 84 per- cent of men and 80 percent of women reported that they were not virgins at first marriage. A century ago, most peo- ple defined premarital sexual intercourse as a social prob- lem; since the 1960s, however, this sexual pattern has come to be viewed as the norm (Laumann et al., 1994).

Learning Sexual Roles: The Case of Topless Dancers Symbolic-interaction theory not only points out that sexual norms vary from time to time and place to place but also offers insights into how people learn and interpret their own sexual behavior. For example, how do women become topless dancers? What do the women who do this work think of their jobs and themselves?

In a study of forty topless dancers in a southwestern city, researchers found that women came to this kind of work gradually, step by step, just as people enter any other career (Thompson & Harrod, 1999). Most of the women explained that their first experience with topless dancing was a brief episode, typically in response to a dare from someone else and in most cases after having had a few drinks. The women reported receiving encouragement for their efforts and, more important, began to realize that they could earn more money dancing than through other more conventional work.

At that point, they made the decision to earn some or all of their income engaged in work that many people con- sider deviant. But most of the women insisted they were doing nothing wrong. Their clubs helped them think well of themselves by having strict “look but don’t touch” pol- icies, by which women defined themselves not as prosti- tutes but as entertainers. In addition, all the women used stage names so that customers did not know their real identities. Likewise, most women told only a few people outside the club what their job actually was; to the rest, including parents, they were simply “in the entertainment business.”

Finally, almost all the women working as topless danc- ers learned to see their work as useful, pointing out that they provided entertainment that harmed no one and for which they were well paid. The women gradually built a world of meanings that both protected them and made them more comfortable with their work (Thompson & Harrod, 1999).

162 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

not only gay men and lesbians but also bisexual people, asex- ual people, and transgender individuals who violate gender norms in their thoughts, actions, or relationships. Heterosexist norms are common in everyday life, as when the mass media celebrate the sex appeal of popular movie stars, almost all of whom are portrayed as heterosexual. In 1998, the comedian and actress Ellen DeGeneres sparked controversy when she came out as a lesbian on her television show. Yet in recent years, popular shows like Modern Family feature openly gay characters, suggesting that attitudes are changing.

Although discrimination against women and African Americans is illegal, bias against people who differ in their sexuality is both common and, in many cases, within the law. But change is under way. Since the beginning of 2014, the Boy Scouts no longer exclude openly gay members. Similarly, in 2014 a California law took effect requiring schools to recog- nize and respect students’ gender identity and allow them to fully participate in all school activities according to their gender identity. The transgender movement is gaining power and acceptance of all sexual identities is likely to increase.

EVALUATE

Feminist theory and queer theory highlight how closely sexuality is tied to various dimensions of social inequality. But critics of these social-conflict theories point out that not everyone thinks of sexuality as a power issue. Rather, most people find that sexuality strength- ens a relationship to a partner. In addition, various social-conflict theories give little attention to the many steps U.S. society has taken to attack bias against women, gay men, lesbians, and transsexual people, including antidiscrimination policies and hate crime laws.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What insights about sexuality do we gain from feminist theory? What about from queer theory? What

Feminist Theory: Women as Sexual Objects Feminist theory points out that sexuality plays a part in social inequality—specifically, men’s domination of women. Pornography, prostitution, and even topless dancing degrade women, casting them in the role of sexual objects that exist primarily for men’s pleasure. Men who value women for their looks and submissiveness, in other words, are unlikely to accept women as social equals. For this reason, the move- ment for gender equality has helped define sexuality in the workplace as a social problem, prompting governments and companies to enact antiharassment policies.

Male domination often involves not just inequality but also the ever-present threat of violence. U.S. culture weaves sex and violence together, a fact evident in expres- sions such as “hitting on” or “banging” someone, which refer to both sexuality and physical violence. For this rea- son, social-conflict theory—especially feminism—has been sharply critical of conventional sexual norms. A few femi- nists reject sexual relations with men entirely, claiming that women who sleep with men are like slaves having sexual relationships with their masters (Dworkin, 1987).

Queer Theory A more recent development in sociology is queer theory, a body of theory and research that challenges the heterosexual bias in U.S. society. Just as feminist theory seeks equal standing for women and men, queer theory seeks equal acceptance of homosexuality and heterosexuality.

Feminism defines the problem as sexism, with one sex socially superior to the other. Queer theory claims that our society is distorted by heterosexism, bias that treats hetero- sexuality as the norm while stigmatizing anyone who violates this norm as “queer.” The heterosexism of U.S. society condemns

APPLYING THEORY

Sexuality

Structural-Functional Theory Symbolic-Interaction Theory

Social-Conflict Theory Including Feminist Theory and Queer Theory

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level

What is important about sexuality?

Structural-functional theory begins pointing to the importance of sex- uality for human reproduction. But society must control sexuality—that is, must control who reproduces with whom—to maintain social order.

Symbolic-interaction theory explains that, like all social patterns, sexuality involves meanings that people attach to their behavior. Patterns of sex- uality and the way people understand them vary from place to place and over time. Sexual roles, including engaging in controversial behavior such as topless dancing, are learned over time.

All social-conflict theories focus on how sexuality is linked to social inequality. Both feminist theory and queer theory are efforts to make soci- ety more equal with regard to gender and sexual orientation.

Is sexuality a problem?

All societies make use of the incest taboo to regulate reproduction, preventing reproduction by closely related partners. To ensure that par- ents care for children and to ensure the right of offspring to inheritance, many societies also employ the idea of “legitimate” birth.

Meanings attached to sexual behavior change over time. Not being a virgin was defined as a problem in the past, especially for unmarried women, but virginity does not mean nearly as much today. To avoid the problem of negative labels, people who engage in controversial behavior involving sexuality, such as topless dancing, develop attitudes and behavior that protect their interests and self-esteem.

Feminist theory considers sexuality a problem to the extent that it allows men to dominate women. The prob- lem of patriarchy contributes to other problems, such as prostitution and pornography, both of which involve men devaluing women. Queer theory opposes the heterosexism in our cul- ture and seeks acceptance of homo- sexuality alongside heterosexuality.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 163

orientation is not a moral issue because it is not a matter of choice; they applaud legal same-sex marriage as a means to extend the benefits of family life to all people, gay and straight.

Overall, the conservative answer to social problems involving sexuality is to have strong social institutions— including churches, schools, and especially families. These institutions teach personal responsibility so that young people can resist peer pressure and other temptations and do what is right. Today, conservatives support a number of policies that promise to strengthen families, such as child- support laws, laws requiring parental notification whenever young women seek abortions, and policies giving parents time away from work to care for family members. Most of all, conservatives claim, U.S. society would greatly benefit from a national effort to ensure that as many children as pos- sible are raised in a home with both a father and a mother.

Liberals: Sex and Individual Choice Liberals emphasize not the traditional morality that is so important to conservatives but individual choice. As lib- erals see it, all people should be free to choose how they express their sexuality. This makes the liberal attitude toward sexuality one of tolerance. In the case of sexual orientation, for example, liberals avoid making judgments that a particular behavior is always right or always wrong; they favor allowing individuals to decide for themselves how to behave. For example, liberals are tolerant of pre- marital sex as long as the people involved have the matu- rity and the knowledge to make responsible choices.

The limits of liberal tolerance appear when some- one threatens another with harm. Liberals define sexual

is one limitation of each of these social-conflict theories? The Applying Theory table compares these theories with structural-functional theory and symbolic-interaction theory.

POLITICS AND SEXUALITY

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 5.6 Analyze issues involving sexuality from vari-

ous positions on the political spectrum.

As always, the way in which people construct prob- lems and what strategies they define as solutions depend on their political attitudes. This holds for sex- uality as well. This section explores the issues raised in this chapter from the conservative, liberal, and radical-left points of view.

Conservatives and the Far Right: The Value of Traditional Morality The basic principle that defines the conservative view of sexuality is that people should be guided not by selfish desires but by established moral principles of right and wrong. To the extent that society encourages the traditional behavior we associate with “gentlemen” and “ladies,” con- servatives argue, most of the problems noted in this chap- ter can be avoided (Sommers, 2003).

Many conservatives support the conventional norms that place sexuality within the traditional bonds of mar- riage. For this reason, conservatives view premarital sex and extramarital sex as social problems, behavior that may lead to other problems including teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Conservatives also con- demn prostitution and pornography not only because they violate traditional standards of decency but also because they threaten marriages.

Some conservatives, and many on the far right, oppose abortion on demand because this policy gives one person the power to end the life of another who is innocent and helpless: the unborn child. Rather than ending 1 million unwanted pregnancies each year through abortion, those on the far right advocate greater personal responsibility so that fewer unwanted pregnancies occur in the first place.

Of course, all conservatives do not agree on every issue. Homosexuality is a case in point. Conservatives who hold far-right views condemn homosexuality as an immoral lifestyle and are unhappy about the legalization of same-sex marriage, which they view as a violation of tra- dition and, in the case of religious conservatives, biblical Scripture. More moderate conservatives believe that sexual

Is prostitution a problem? Conservatives tend to oppose the sale of sex on moral grounds. Many liberals support the idea that adults should be free to behave as they wish as long as they do not harm others. But other liberals— and most radicals—condemn the selling of sex because it perpetuates traditional gender stereotypes that harm women.

R ap

id Ey

e/ E

+/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

164 Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality

will ever create a society in which women and men stand as equals. As a result, radical feminists seek the elimination of gender itself. As noted in Chapter 4 (“Gender Inequality”), many radical feminists believe that to do this, society must rethink and revise the biological process of reproduction. Perhaps, they suggest, new reproductive technologies will liberate women from their historical role in childbearing, which will open up the possibility of equal participation in social life.

In the short term, many radical feminists encourage women to work together to achieve political aims and to avoid dependency on men. Some even call for ending sex- ual ties to men, offering a strong voice on behalf of lesbi- ans. Lesbians, after all, defy two basic structures of U.S. society: Their homosexuality challenges the heterosexual norm, and choosing to live without men is a direct chal- lenge to male power.

Queer theory argues that U.S. society privileges het- erosexuality while dismissing anyone who violates that norm as “queer.” So deep is this heterosexual bias, queer theory claims, that nothing less than challenging the roots of our way of life can produce an egalitarian society in which all people are equal participants in social life.

The Left to Right table summarizes issues related to sex- uality as viewed from each of the three political perspectives.

Going On from Here You might be tempted to conclude that, if anything is cer- tain to be part of our way of life a century from now, it is sex. Societies may change in many ways, but sex seems to remain a steady element of human experience.

violence, AIDS, and teenage pregnancy as social problems for this reason. Similarly, although liberals defend freedom of expression, many claim that pornography and prostitu- tion are harmful to women.

Liberals look to government to address various social problems. Public schools should take the lead in teaching young people what they need to know to make responsi- ble choices about sex. Liberals expect the criminal justice system to protect women from domestic violence and rape. In addition, government agencies should monitor the workplace to be sure that employees are free from sexual harassment. Finally, only the vast resources of the federal government are likely to bring an eventual end to the AIDS epidemic.

Believing that individuals should be responsible for their own behavior, liberals support making abortion available to all and leaving the decision about abortion to the woman herself. Most liberals support government funding for abortions so that all pregnant women, regard- less of their ability to pay, have choices.

The Radical Left: Go to the Root of the Problem Radicals on the left view the issues in this chapter— including sexual orientation, pornography, sexual violence, and prostitution—as dimensions of social inequality. In their view, each problem comes about because some cate- gory of people has power over another.

Radical feminists view U.S. society as strongly patri- archal. Because male power runs deep into the structure of U.S. society, radical feminists doubt that efforts at reform

LEFT TO RIGHT

The Politics of Sexuality

Radical-Left View Liberal View Far Right and Conservative Views

What is the problem? Men dominate women, just as heterosex- uals dominate people with other sexual orientations.

Prostitution and pornography harm women, teen pregnancy is linked to poverty, and sexual harassment prevents people from doing their jobs.

The far right holds that premarital sex, extramarital sex, and homosexuality violate traditional principles of right and wrong; abortion, too, is morally wrong. More mod- erate conservatives are more accepting of these social patterns.

What is the solution? Because sexism and heterosexism are deeply rooted in the existing system, radical feminism advocates change in the direction of a gender-free society. Similarly, queer theory argues that equality for people of all sexual orientations will require a basic change in our culture.

Government must combat pros- titution and pornography, keep sexuality out of the workplace, ensure that abortion is available to all women, and pursue a cure for AIDS.

Families—preferably with two active, involved parents—must teach children traditional virtues, such as personal responsibility in matters of sexuality. To the extent that they do, problems such as teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections will decline.

JOIN THE DEBATE 1. In your opinion, which issues discussed in this chapter are the most

serious social problems? Why?

2. Overall, do you think the sexual climate in the United States is getting better? Is it getting worse? Why?

3. Which of the three political analyses of sexuality included here do you find most convincing? Why?

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 165

the past decade, the widespread enactment of sexual harassment policies has sought to remove sexuality from workplace relationships. The #MeToo and #TimesUp movements on social media now demand that our cul- ture reexamine men’s use of power to impose sexuality on women.

Going on from here, what changes should we expect in the future? Although continued controversy is certain, the trend toward greater tolerance of homosexuality seems sure to continue. The legalization of same-sex marriage unfolded far more quickly than almost anyone imagined. Public acceptance of homosexuality is now greater than ever, and the transgender movement is building on that success.

On another front, efforts to bring an end to the AIDS epidemic have expanded and shown promise. With time, this epidemic, which has caused more than 675,000 deaths in the United States, will be tamed. But what about the poor nations of the world, where the death toll since 1981 now exceeds 25 million? And back at home, what about the divisive issue of abortion? All that is certain is that this controversy will continue.

Sex may always be part of social life, but in this case, the more things stay the same, the more they change.

But is it? This chapter has traced some remarkable changes in sexual practices and attitudes in the United States. From the rigid “sex as reproduction” view held by the earliest European settlers on our shores to the open, “anything goes” views of the sexual revolution, ideas about sex have been anything but static.

Change is also evident in the definition of sexual prob- lems. At the beginning of the twentieth century, homosexu- ality was considered to be a social problem: No one talked about it openly, many people saw it as a sin or a sickness, and homosexual behavior was against the law almost everywhere. As the gay rights movement gained strength, an increasing tolerance of sexual diversity entered U.S. culture. Today, it is possible to live an openly gay life, and millions of people do. The transsexual movement is now challenging any rigid sexual identities.

Several decades ago, few people considered sexual harassment to be a problem, and there was widespread acceptance of the idea that men could think of women in sexual terms even in the workplace. As women have gained economic, political, and educational clout, such thinking has been replaced by the idea that women as well as men should be evaluated on the basis of their abilities and performance rather than their looks. In

166

Is it OK for young people to be sexually active? Just about everyone has an opinion about this issue, if only because sexual activity can lead to a number of problems, including pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections. Look at the accompanying photos to see two different approaches to defining a solution to these problems.

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 5 Sexuality and Inequality

Liberals agree that unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections are serious problems. They claim that the problem is not sex itself, however, but rather a lack of understanding about how to have safe sex. For that reason, liberals favor solutions such as sex education and wide availability of condoms and other forms of birth control. Here, AIDS Healthcare Foundation staff and volunteers distribute condoms in Oakland, California, during a recent “Condom Nation” tour. What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach?

B re

nd an

S m

ia lo

w sk

i/A FP

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 167

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises 1. How has your campus reacted to the movement in

opposition to sexual harassment that gained strength during 2017? What policies and procedures protect people on your campus? What student organizations are involved in this effort?

2. Ask an official in your college’s student services office about the extent of sexual violence on campus. See what you can learn about the percentage of crimes re- ported and the policies and procedures to assist and protect victims.

3. Do some research in the library and on the internet to learn more about past and present laws in your state and local community regarding a sexuality-related issue of interest to you, such as prostitution, sodomy, sexual violence, stalking, or sexual harassment.

4. In recent years, the social media app Tinder has emerged as a dating site that many people describe as a “hookup app.” In what ways do you think that the internet and social media have changed patterns of sexuality? Consider dating sites and also the wide- spread availability of online pornography.

Conservatives claim that our society has become too permissive with regard to sexual activity. Many favor the traditional idea that young people should delay sexual activity until marriage. If everyone followed this standard, they say, problems such as unwanted pregnancy and STIs would be very rare. The abstinence move- ment is one conservative solution that is asking young women to wear chas- tity rings that symbolize their pledge to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. What do you see as the pros and cons of this solution?

Hint: Both of these approaches will work to some degree. At the same time, which one you

would favor depends on your political attitudes. Conservatives take the position that traditional

moral values, combined with personal responsibility, go a long way to solving problems. But

is it reasonable to expect young people not to become sexually active? The liberal approach

assumes the opposite—that young people will be sexually active. Liberals say that availability

of condoms or other birth control, as well as sex education, will help young people make safer

choices. But this approach offers little guidance to help a young person know whether and

when getting into a sexual relationship with someone is a good idea. Where do you stand on

this issue?

Marvi Lacar/Getty Images.

168

Making the Grade CHAPTER 5 Sexuality and Inequality

• The transgender movement to provide people with the freedom to claim their own gender identity is gaining strength.

What Is Sex?

5.1 Explain why sex is both a biological and cultural issue.

Sex is a biological issue.

• Females and males have different organs used for re- production and also different physical traits.

Sex is a cultural issue.

• Sexual attitudes and practices vary from one place to another and over time.

sex (p. 139) the biological distinction between females and males; also, activity that leads to physical gratification and possibly reproduction

Sexual Attitudes in the United States

5.2 Discuss changes in sexual attitudes and practices over the history of the United States.

Sexual attitudes have changed over the course of U.S. history:

• In our nation’s history, early colonists viewed sex rig- idly as intended solely for reproduction.

• In recent decades, sex has become more a matter of in- timacy and personal pleasure.

• The sexual revolution that began in the 1960s encour- aged people to be freer and more open about sexuality.

• By the 1980s, a sexual counterrevolution arose, reflect- ing the country’s more conservative politics as well as fears about sexually transmitted diseases.

• The sexual revolution is continuing today among older people, sometimes making use of drugs that treat erec- tile dysfunction.

Sexual Orientation

5.3 Describe four sexual orientations.

• Although the norm in all societies is heterosexuality, other sexual orientations—including homosexuality, bisexuality, and asexuality—are found as well.

• Although sexual orientation is partly a cultural issue, most evidence suggests that it is rooted in biology.

• The gay rights movement has been influential since the 1950s. A recent success was the legalization of same- sex marriage in several states.

sexual orientation (p. 142) a person’s romantic and emotional attraction to another person heterosexuality (p. 142) sexual attraction to someone of the other sex homosexuality (p. 142) sexual attraction to someone of the same sex bisexuality (p. 142) sexual attraction to people of both sexes asexuality (p. 142) the absence of sexual attraction to people of either sex homophobia (p. 146) an aversion to or hostility toward people thought to be gay, lesbian, or bisexual transgender (p. 146) appearing or behaving in ways that chal- lenge conventional cultural norms concerning how females and males should look and act

Sexuality, Inequality, and Controversy

5.4 Discuss several current issues and controversies involving sexuality.

Pornography • Pornography consists of words or images that cause

sexual arousal.

• Conservatives oppose pornography on moral grounds; many liberals object to it as demeaning to women.

• Some research links viewing pornography among males to higher aggression and greater acceptance of violence.

Sexual Harassment • In recent years, sexual harassment has been defined as

a social problem; social media helped create a national reckoning about this type of sexual abuse.

• Today, laws protect people from sexual harassment, es- pecially in the workplace.

• Most but not all cases of harassment involve men vic- timizing women.

Prostitution • Prostitution has long been widespread in the United

States.

• Law enforcement usually targets female prostitutes rather than male clients and low-income streetwalkers rather than more affluent call girls.

• The extent of prostitution is even greater in Asia and many other poor regions of the world where sex tour- ism is widespread.

Chapter 5 Sexuality and Inequality 169

• People learn sexual behavior; the meaning they attach to sexuality affects how they think of them- selves.

Social-Conflict Analysis: Feminist Theory and Queer Theory

Social-conflict theory focuses on social inequality.

• Feminist theory points out that many aspects of sexu- ality reflect men’s social domination of women.

• Queer theory claims that the heterosexist bias in U.S. culture stigmatizes gay men and lesbians, bisexual people, asexual people, and transgender individuals.

Teenage Pregnancy • About 230,000 U.S. teens give birth each year.

• Most teens who become pregnant are not married, and more than half decide to keep their babies.

• Babies born to teens, especially young women who are poor, are at high risk for poverty as adults.

Abortion • Abortion is among the most divisive issues in the Unit-

ed States.

• The debate over abortion rights involves not just unintended pregnancy but also the social standing of women.

Sexually Transmitted Infections • Unprotected sexual activity transmits some fifty infec-

tions, including deadly AIDS.

• In global perspective, AIDS is a medical catastrophe, especially in Africa.

pornography (p. 147) words or images intended to cause sexual arousal sexual harassment (p. 149) unwanted comments, gestures, or physical contact of a sexual nature prostitution (p. 151) the selling of sexual services abortion (p. 154) the intentional termination of a pregnancy sexually transmitted infections (STIs) (p. 156) infections spread by sexual contact

Theories of Sexuality

5.5 Apply sociological theory to issues involving sexuality.

Structural-Functional Analysis: Controlling Sexuality

Structural-functional theory emphasizes society’s need to control sexuality.

• The incest taboo and social norms regarding “legit- imate” offspring help clarify social relationships and obligations between members of families.

• Some sexual patterns that are widely regarded as devi- ant, such as prostitution, may also have positive func- tions, at least for men.

Symbolic-Interaction Analysis: Defining Sexuality

Symbolic-interaction theory highlights the fact that mem- bers of a society socially construct sexuality just as they cre- ate all reality.

• Sexual norms, such as those involving virginity, often change over time and also vary from place to place.

POLITICS AND SEXUALITY Constructing Problems and Defining  Solutions

5.6 Analyze issues involving sexuality from various positions on the political spectrum.

Conservatives and the Far Right: The Value of Tradi- tional Morality

• Conservatives believe sexuality should be guided by traditional moral principles of right and wrong. They oppose abortion and premarital and extramarital sex, and many condemn homosexuality.

• Conservatives emphasize the importance of two- parent families in raising children with strong values and self-control.

Liberals: Sex and Individual Choice • Liberals emphasize the importance of individual free-

doms. All people should be free to choose how they express their sexuality as long as their choices do not harm others.

• Liberals look to government to address social prob- lems such as domestic violence and rape, sexual ha- rassment, and the AIDS epidemic.

The Radical Left: Go to the Root of the Problem • Radicals on the left point out that the root of many

social problems related to sexuality is inequality.

• Radical feminism and queer theory argue the need for basic changes in U.S. society in pursuit of equality for all, female and male, gay and straight.

queer theory (p. 162) a body of theory and research that challeng- es the heterosexual bias in U.S. society heterosexism (p. 162) bias that treats heterosexuality as the norm while stigmatizing anyone who violates this norm as “queer”

170

6.4 Apply sociological theory to issues of aging and age stratification.

6.5 Analyze aging and age stratification from various positions on the political spectrum.

6.1 Explain the effects of industrialization on the process of growing old.

6.2 Discuss the graying of the United States and the social diversity of the older population.

6.3 Assess various problems faced by today’s elderly population.

Chapter 6

Aging and Inequality

Learning Objectives

D E

D D

E D

A /A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

S al

ly a

nd R

ic ha

rd G

re en

hi ll/

A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

D m

yt ro

Z in

ke vy

ch /1

23 R

F.

Constructing the Problem

Do you know many elderly people?

The number of seniors is increasing so fast that there are already more people ages sixty-five and older than there are young people ages fourteen to twenty-four.

Do older people get the respect they deserve?

Each year, about one out of ten people over the age of sixty experience some form of abuse; many are victimized by family members.

Is using medical technology to extend life a good idea?

It can be. But because most deaths in the United States come after a decision to halt medical treatment, people must face the difficult responsibility of decid- ing when life should end.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 171

Tracking the Trends

Is the decision to retire from paid work simply a personal choice? Back in 1970, the typical working woman retired at about the age of sixty-eight; the typical man at almost sixty-nine. In the decades that followed, economic prosperity helped to push the retirement age downward. In the first years of this century, average retirement age had dropped to below sixty-five. But by about 2007, as the economy began to fall into recession, the retirement age began to move sharply upward. Today, as this chapter explains, many older workers are con- cerned that they do not have the financial security to retire, and many who need income cannot find work. What programs or policies might increase the financial security of older workers?

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

A ve

ra g

e R

et ir

em en

t A

g e

Year 1976 1984 1992

Men

Women

2000 2008 2016

SOURCE: OECD (2017).

172 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

Chapter Overview What does it mean to grow “old”? This chapter tracks the increasing share of our na- tion’s population that has reached the age of sixty-five, a trend that is often called the “graying of the United States.” You will learn about many of the challenges facing older people, from the experience of social isolation to living in poverty to the horror of outright abuse. In this process, it will become clear that the life process of aging is also a dimension of social stratification. You will carry out theoretical analysis of age-related inequality and learn how the process of defining certain issues as problems and partic- ular programs and policies as solutions reflects people’s political attitudes.

The Rolling Stones, a musical group that came on the scene in 1962, helped to define the tumultuous decade of the 1960s, an era of “sex, drugs, and rock and roll.” This was also a decade in which popular culture celebrated youth and young people used to say, “Don’t trust anyone over thirty.”

But times have changed. In 2018, Mick Jagger, the Stones’ lead singer and a great-grandfather, turned seventy-five. With Keith Richards, Charlie Watts, and Ronnie Wood (all past the age of seventy), the Rolling Stones continue to play rock and roll and serve to remind us that aging is what you make it to be.

Here in the United States, more and more people are living into their seventies, eighties, nineties, and beyond. Many of them are active and some even go to Rolling Stones concerts. But not everyone finds that growing old is a happy time of life. As this chapter explains, the old- est members of our society face a number of challenges,

including social isolation, prejudice and discrimination, a rising rate of poverty, and sometimes even outright vio- lence. In addition, older people must face up to the sober- ing realization that their lives are nearing an end.

Growing Old 6.1 Explain the effects of industrialization on the

process of growing old.

Old age is the final stage in the life course, the socially con- structed stages that people pass through as they live out their lives. In our culture, commonly recognized stages of life include childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age. The last of these stages is the focus of this chapter and, more generally, of gerontology, the study of aging and the elderly.

We tend to think of the gradual physical, mental, and social changes that occur during the first half of the life course in positive terms as “growing up.” By about the age of forty, however, members of our society begin to define the process of aging in more negative terms, as if people start “growing down.” After midlife, physical strength begins to decline, hair starts to turn gray and may also fall out, and the skin gradually becomes wrinkled. Among older men and women, injuries come more easily and also take longer to heal. In addition, among older people, ill- nesses are more common, and the senses (sight, taste, hear- ing, and smell) become less sharp. There is truth to the idea that people slow down as they age. Compared with thirty- year-olds, people at age seventy-five have a bodily metab- olism that has slowed by one-sixth, their heart and kidney functions are reduced by one-third, and their breathing capacity has fallen by half.

Older people can become seriously ill with something as common as the flu, an infection that a younger person would shake off in a day or two. Elderly people also suf- fer from more chronic (long-term) illnesses such as arthritis M

ar ku

s S

ch re

ib er

/A P

Im ag

es .

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 173

Industrialization also brings change to family rela- tionships, separating the generations. In past centuries, for example, family members worked together on the farm, with the old teaching the young. In the nineteenth century, as factories sprang up, the lure of better pay drew younger workers from rural farming communities to the industrial cities. In the new industrial economy, young people had less reason to look to their elders for work or for guidance about how to live. Just as important, as many younger men and women headed off for the growing cities and left their aging parents behind, the share of elderly people living in poverty began to rise.

Early in the twentieth century, the number of elderly people facing serious poverty steadily increased, and some older men and women ended up in poorhouses that were no better than prisons. Fortunately, as the century moved ahead, the economic standing of older people in the United States started getting better. Eventually, the poorhouses were closed, in part due to people who formed a social movement demanding better treatment for older people.

Government also acted to assist older people. In 1935, as part of President Roosevelt’s “New Deal,” Congress passed the Social Security Act, which provides a monthly pension to everyone over a certain age (currently sixty-five). In addition to providing needed income, this program symbolizes our society’s commitment to the idea that older people are worthy of support. By about 1970, the average income and wealth of older people began to climb and poverty rates began to fall. Today, the poverty rate for the elderly (9.3 percent) is below that for the population as a whole (12.7 percent) (Powell, Branco, & Williamson, 1996; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

that, though not life-threatening, often cause pain and can make everyday activities difficult. Most seriously, the odds of a deadly disease, such as cancer, stroke, or heart disease, steadily increase with advancing age.

In terms of health, elderly people also differ among themselves. For those with higher income, health is typ- ically better because they have more money to spend on safe housing, good nutrition, and high-quality health care. Well-being also reflects lifestyle and personal choices that are available to anyone: Factors such as regular exercise, not smoking cigarettes, and limiting use of alcohol all con- tribute to good health for people of any age (Holmes & Holmes, 1995; Medina, 1996).

Industrialization and Aging The life course is socially constructed because growing old is not just a matter of biological changes. How a culture defines this stage of life makes a big difference in how peo- ple experience old age.

Preindustrial Societies: Elders as Social Elite In tradi- tional, rural societies where many people engage in farm- ing, ways of life change slowly. The knowledge gained by the oldest members of society remains valuable, so younger people look up to elders as wise and deserving of respect. In addition, the oldest people (typically the oldest men) own most of the land, which gives them not only wisdom but also considerable wealth and power. For these reasons, preindustrial societies take the form of a gerontocracy, a social system that gives a society’s oldest members the most wealth, power, and prestige.

In farming societies, seniors typically remain socially active both at work and as family leaders until they are unable to continue. At this point, elders can expect to live out their lives under the care of their children. In many societies, younger people continue to direct attention and respect toward elders even after the older generation has died in the religious pattern called ancestor worship.

Industrial Societies: Elderly as Social Problem The Industrial Revolution did much to raise everyone’s living standards, but it also changed age stratification to reduce the social power and prestige of older people relative to those who are younger. This change happened because industrial technology speeds up the rate of cultural change, which encourages younger people to view the knowledge and skill of seniors as old-fashioned and unimportant to their lives. In preindustrial societies, people use the word “elder” as a term of respect for older people. Members of modern, industrial societies, by contrast, use the term “elderly,” a word that has a more negative meaning. It is not far off the mark to say that in societies like our own, many younger people regard older people as something of a social problem.

In traditional, agricultural communities, as in this rice-producing region of Japan, most wealth and power are held by older people, who typically continue working well into old age. Why does indus- trialization reduce the relative social standing of older people?

B .S

.P .I/

C or

bi s

D oc

um en

ta ry

/G et

ty Im

ag es

.

174 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Will the Golden Years Lose Their Glow? Growing Old in Japan Eighty-one-year-old Taizo Komurasaki grew up during the horrors of World War II. Later, he went to college and found a job with a trading company where he spent his whole career. At the age of sixty, he retired with a pension and looked forward to another twenty-five years or more of financial security.

But his golden years have already lost some of their glow. Even before the current economic crisis, his pension was only $1,625 per month ($19,500 per year)—not nearly enough to live comfortably in a country where the cost of living is among the highest in the world. To make matters worse, both corporations and government in Japan have been forced to reduce pensions during a long period of economic recession that began about 1990 and has recently become worse.

Another reason that the pressure to cut pensions has become intense is that the share of Japan’s population that is over the age of sixty-five is greater than in any other country in the world. In 2017, 27.7 percent of Japanese people were over age sixty-five (compared with 15.2 percent in the United States); in 2025, the Japanese figure will be about 31 percent (19 percent in the United States).

The main reason for the rapid increase in the elderly population in Japan is the low birth rate. The birth rate has declined so much in Japan that the country’s total population is now starting to decline and is projected to decrease by almost 25 percent by 2050. Everyone understands an aging population means fewer workers to pay into a system that must provide pensions and other benefits to more people who have retired.

A long-standing Japanese tradition requires children (especially daughters) to provide care for aging parents. But tough economic times have left most couples wondering if they can afford to support aging mothers and fathers. Also, most of today’s Japanese couples live in small apartments with little space for another person. Finally, as more Japanese women have joined the labor force, they have less time and energy to devote to elder care.

One sign of changing times is that the Japanese are now building facilities that were once unknown in that nation— nursing homes. As elders live longer, as pensions run low, and as families find they have less to offer to aging parents, the cultural taboo against placing parents in nursing homes is starting to break down.

What Do You Think? 1. In both Japan and the United States, the number of retired

seniors drawing government funds is outpacing the number of younger workers paying into the system. What do you think should be done to head off a future financial crisis?

2. What responsibilities should families have to provide care for their elder members?

3. Do you see ways in which the recent economic recession has affected the lives of older people here in the United States? Explain.

SOURCES: Strom (2000), Taylor (2016), and Population Reference Bureau (2018).

But, as they say, money isn’t everything. Despite being better off economically, many of today’s older men and women feel devalued by today’s youth culture. The mass media typically focus on the lives, fashions, and attitudes of young people, making older people seem old-fashioned and of little value (Kosterlitz, 1997; Wise, 1997).

Not all industrial countries have been so hard on their oldest members. Japan stands out as a nation that still has some of its centuries-old respect for old people. But even in Japan, older people face challenges, as the Social Problems in Global Perspective box explains.

Life Expectancy Life expectancy is the average life span of a country’s popu- lation. Life expectancy has changed dramatically over the course of human history. In the earliest hunting and gather- ing societies, most people died in childhood; someone who lived to thirty had reached a ripe old age. Today, life expec- tancy in the world’s ten poorest nations, all of which are in found in Africa, is less than fifty-five years (Population Reference Bureau, 2018.

In high-income countries, which have better nutri- tion, sanitation, and medical care, life expectancy is con- siderably greater. Today, males born in the United States can expect to live seventy-six years and females eighty-one years (National Center for Health Statistics, 2017).

Just about everyone sees increasing life expectancy as good, of course, because we all have an interest in living longer. But this trend also means that societies must meet the needs of an increasing number of older people. This increase is especially pronounced in the United States, as we now explain.

The Graying of the United States 6.2 Discuss the graying of the United States and the

social diversity of the older population.

When the United States won its independence in 1776, the country was very young in more ways than one. Half the new nation’s people were under the age of sixteen, and it

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 175

from North Dakota and Minnesota down to Texas, and a much lower share near the East Coast and West Coast. The patterns are shown in National Map 6–1.

Elders: A Diverse Population Sociologists conduct research to understand the needs and problems of the elderly population of the United States. The evidence shows that elders in our society are socially quite diverse.

Three Levels of “Old” At a time of increasing life expec- tancy, one way in which older people differ from one another is age itself. Researchers divide the elderly into three categories. Most people sixty-five to seventy-four years of age—the “younger old”—live independently and enjoy good health. People ages seventy-five to eighty- four—the “older old”—are more likely to need support services. Elders age eighty-five and older—the “oldest old”—are those who need the most assistance. Of these three categories of elders, the oldest old are increasing in number the most rapidly. From just 0.1 percent of the U.S. population in 1900, by 2016 they made up 2 percent of our people, which represents a twenty-fold increase (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

was then rare for someone to live to the age of sixty. Despite the familiar image of gray-haired “founding fathers,” the great leaders of the colonial period were actually young by today’s standards. When George Washington, who became our nation’s first president, commanded the troops in the Revolutionary War, he was in his early forties, and when Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, he was just thirty-three.

By 1900, about 3 million people in the United States were older than sixty-five, but they made up just 4 percent of the total population. As shown in Figure 6–1, the elderly share doubled by 1950, and it will double again by the year 2020, when the elderly population of this country will reach 56 million (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). Against the trend of a rapidly increasing elderly population, the num- ber of young people in the United States is staying about the same. The result is what sociologists call the “graying of the United States.” Figure 6–1 shows that the share of the U.S. population over age sixty-five is projected to reach 20 percent by about 2030.

As a result of this trend, all of us will have more contact with older people than ever before. Of course, the extent of contact with older people depends a great deal on where in the country we live. The elderly are a far larger share of the population in some regions, especially in the midsection,

Median age of the U.S. populationPopulation aged 65 and over (%)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2050204020302020201020001990198019701960195019401930192019101900

22.9 24.1

25.3 26.5

29.0 30.2 29.6

28.1 30.0

32.9

35.3 37.2

38.5 40.1

41.6 42.4

4.1 4.3 4.7 5.4 6.8

8.1 9.2 9.9

11.3 12.6 12.4 13.0

16.9

20.6 21.7 22.1

Year

2060

43.0

23.6

Figure 6–1 The Graying of U.S. Society

The Census Bureau projects that people age sixty-five and older will reach about 20 percent of the U.S. population by 2030. At that point, almost half the U.S. population will be over the age of forty.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

176 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

Keep in mind that the older population of the United States is less diverse than the younger population. One rea- son is that, on average, minorities do not live as long as white people. For example, life expectancy among African Americans is four years less than it is for whites. In addi- tion, much of our country’s racial and ethnic diversity results from immigration, and most immigrants are young people. Half of U.S. children under five years of age are now minorities (including African, Asian, Latino, and Native Americans), and the same is true of just 22 percent of those over age sixty-five (Cohn, 2016).

A final dimension of diversity among the elderly involves gender. Women tend to live longer than men. Therefore, although women are a slight majority of the total population (51 percent), they represent 56 per- cent of all people over the age of sixty-five. Among this country’s roughly 75,000 centenarians—people age 100 years or older—81 percent are women (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Class, Race, Ethnicity, and Gender Social inequal- ity shapes the lives of people of all ages. Older men and women who are well-off financially, especially when they are in good health, have lots of choices about where and how they want to live. Many of these fortunate people lead active lives including travel that provides both adventure and learning. Some well-off seniors retire to the South and Southwest to enjoy the mild weather and reasonable cost of living.

But these are the exceptions, not the rule. Just one in twenty older people ends up making a move to the Sunbelt. Why? Many (especially those with health prob- lems) want to stay close to family members. For most, however, the reason comes down to money: They simply cannot afford it.

The elderly are also racially and ethnically diverse, and the older minority population faces the challenges that all minorities face—lower incomes, on average, as well as prejudice and discrimination.

Sheila Markham and her many elderly friends in rural Boyd County, Nebraska, have a hard time finding young people to shovel their winter snow.

People Age 65 or Older as Percentage of Population

20.0% or more

17.5% to 19.9%

15.0% to 17.4%

12.5% to 14.9%

12.4% or less

U.S. average: 14.5%

HAWAII

ALASKA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS

MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C. WEST

VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

UTAH

ARIZONA

LOUISIANA

MINNESOTA

Seeing Ourselves National Map 6–1 The Elderly Population across the United States

Common sense suggests that elderly people live in the Sunbelt, enjoying the warmer climate of the South and Southwest. Although it is true that Florida has a disproportionate share of people over age sixty-five, it turns out that most counties with high percentages of older people are in the Midwest. What do you think accounts for this pattern? Hint: In which regions of the United States does the largest share of younger people leave in search of jobs?

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 177

Men have better odds of finding another partner because U.S. culture supports the pairing of older men and younger women much more than the pairing of older women with younger men. It is also a numbers game: Given the differ- ence in life expectancy, older women significantly outnum- ber older men.

Where do elders turn for support and companionship? Many elderly people look to community services provided by senior citizen centers as a source of social contact. But for most seniors, families are the main support system. Almost half of all elders have at least one adult child who lives no more than twenty minutes away. Half of middle-aged U.S. adults provide some elder care. According to researchers, the typical caregiver is a woman (most commonly a daugh- ter or daughter-in-law of the elderly person) who is about fifty years of age. She typically provides almost twenty-four hours of care per week to an aging parent, and one in four of these women spends forty-one hours or more per week providing care (Family Caregiver Alliance, 2016).

Retirement Industrialization made societies much more productive so that it was no longer necessary for almost everyone to work. As a result, the very young were excused from con- tinuous labor. In fact, members of industrial societies came to view child labor (a practice still common in low- income nations around the world) as wrong, and they expect young people to spend much of their daily lives in school. At the other end of the life course, older people, too, began to step away from the labor force. And so it has become common for older people to retire from the labor force so that they can spend their remaining years doing what they wish.

When younger adults think about their future, most imagine that they will retire from paid work at about the age of sixty-five, an age that has become linked to retire- ment. Back in 1950, people in the United States typically retired about the age of sixty-eight; by 2005, however, the median age for retirement had fallen to sixty-three.

But beginning about 2006, this trend began to reverse itself, especially after the onset of the economic recession by 2009. For many older workers, the weaker economy meant pay cuts or the loss of some (or even all) of a pension or retirement. As a result, more men and women remain in the labor force, and they are also working longer hours. By 2016, the typical age of retirement for U.S. workers had moved back up to sixty-five for women and sixty-seven for men. In a world of economic uncertainty, people are now cautious about giving up paid work. Some have no plans to retire at all; others plan to retire in small steps, a pattern called staged retirement (Gendell, 2008; Brown, 2014; U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; OECD, 2017).

Problems of Aging 6.3 Assess various problems faced by today’s elderly

population.

We all experience change at every stage of life. But a com- mon opinion among the elderly is that changes in old age present the greatest challenges they have ever faced. Although the physical health of seniors is, on the whole, far better than stereotypes of “frail old people” suggest, most older women and men spend a lot of time and money trying to improve their well-being. For many, pain from various ailments limits activity. Sooner or later, just about all older people have to learn the tough lesson that they now have to depend on others to carry out everyday rou- tines. In addition, as family members and friends die, older people face loneliness and the knowledge that the end of their own lives is drawing near. We now take a closer look at problems common to society’s oldest members.

Social Isolation At any age, being by yourself can provoke loneliness, anx- iety, and depression. But of all the stages of life, old age presents the greatest risk of social isolation. Retirement from work closes off one important source of social activ- ity. As people age, declining health limits their ability to get around, and a youth culture encourages negative ste- reotypes of the elderly as sickly, old-fashioned, or “out of touch,” ideas that may discourage others from interacting with older people.

In addition, as time goes on, friends, neighbors, and family members die, shrinking an older person’s social world. Few human experiences are as difficult and isolat- ing as the death of a close friend and, especially, a spouse or life partner. One study of older men and women who had lost a spouse found that three-fourths cited loneliness as a serious problem. This experience of social isolation is surely a key reason that, as researchers have long docu- mented, the months following the death of a spouse place the surviving partner at high risk of death, sometimes by suicide (Benjamin & Wallis, 1963; Lund, 1989; Sullivan & Fenelon, 2014).

Gender figures into the problem of social isolation. This is because the experience of social isolation is more common to elderly women who typically outlive older men. Among people over sixty-five, 70 percent of men live with a wife, but only 45 percent of women live with a husband. From another angle, about 20 percent of elderly men live alone compared with 36 percent of older women (Federal Interagency Forum on Aging Related Statistics, 2017).

Another reason for this difference in social isolation is that widowers are more likely than widows to remarry.

178 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

about that age and partly because analysts con- cluded the government could afford to pay retire- ment benefits to that many people without raising taxes too much. But since then, life expectancy has increased so that people who reach the age of sixty-five can expect to live almost an additional twenty years. This is one reason that Congress phased out mandatory retirement policies by 1994. Rigid retirement policies remain for only a small number of occupations, such as airline pilots, who must retire at age sixty-five (Bosworth & Burtless, 1998; Wyatt, 2000).

Among all high-income nations, we can expect to see the recent trend toward later retire- ment continue. For one thing, in Europe and Japan, lower birth rates will hold down the num- ber of working-age people. Economic growth will depend on older people spending more years in the labor force. In addition, the rising costs of pensions and health care for an aging population

threaten to overwhelm available resources. As a result, older people may have to work longer to ensure finan- cial security. Currently in the United States, people can begin drawing on Social Security at the age of sixty-two, although full benefits kick in at age sixty-six (and, by 2026, age sixty-seven). Expect to see governments—both here and in other high-income nations—continue to push back the point of retirement (The Economist, 2011).

Ageism Whether older people are working or retired, they may find that others look down on them simply because of their age. Ageism is prejudice and discrimination directed toward older people (Butler, 1975, 1994; Cohen, 2001). Like racism and sexism, ageism defines physical traits—in this case, graying hair, wrinkled skin, or any other signs of advancing age—as evidence of being less worthy as a person. Certainly, ageism helps explain the fact that many older people turn to medications such as Botox and Viagra and even undergo cosmetic surgery in order to lessen the effects of aging on their looks and behavior.

Because our society is more likely to judge women than men by their physical appearance, ageism is often a bigger issue for women. But whenever anyone portrays elders of either sex as if they were old-fashioned, narrow-minded, or even senile, they devalue them as human beings.

Age-Based Prejudice Ageism involves prejudice— negative prejudgments about the elderly. Such prejudice can be blatant, as when employers pass over a job appli- cation from an older person because they prefer hiring someone younger. Prejudice can also be subtle but just as harmful, as when a doctor assumes that an ailment is

Even if you are decades away from retirement, it is a good idea to do some planning for this transition. The ear- lier one begins a program of regular savings, the greater the resources available to support life after retirement. But retirement involves more than a loss of income because work is also a source of personal satisfaction and social ties. Therefore, people must also consider how to replace work with other activities that provide similar personal benefits. Of course, there is no single formula for a satisfy- ing retirement. Some people are eager to jump into entirely new activities, others are satisfied to spend much more time with children and grandchildren, and still others are content simply to sit back and relax. In nearly all cases, however, what people can and cannot do in retirement will depend on the state of their health and the extent of their financial resources (Neugarten, 1996; Gall, Evans, & Howard, 1997; Pitt, 2009).

Employers can play a part in a successful retirement, easing this transition by allowing people to retire in steps. For example, colleges and universities may allow profes- sors nearing retirement to “step down” their teaching load. Schools may also provide support for retired professors to conduct research and to attend professional meetings. Many colleges and universities also help older people by giving retiring faculty members the title “emeritus profes- sor” so that they keep their faculty standing, and many per- mit them to continue using an e-mail account, make use of the gym, and maybe even continue to park on campus. But most employers are not so helpful. In today’s age of corpo- rate downsizing, some companies simply push older (and often higher-paid) workers out the door. In cases of forced retirement, people usually face the greatest challenges.

What is the government’s retirement policy? Back in the 1930s, the U.S. government set the retirement age at sixty-five, partly because most people stopped working at

A rising number of older women and men are in the paid labor force, a trend that increased during the recent economic downturn. How does ageism affect the types of jobs older people hold?

Ji m

W es

t/ A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 179

Keep in mind that even people in middle age experi- ence age discrimination. In fact, the typical complaint of age discrimination now comes from people in their for- ties, not their sixties (U.S. Department of Labor, 2016; U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 2016).

Whatever the age of victims, age discrimination is ille- gal. But this law is difficult to enforce because many people who are turned down for a job never know exactly why. In addition, companies can legally lay off higher-salaried workers in favor of those who are paid less, even though this policy usually hurts older people the most (Palmore, 1998; Labaton, 2000).

Ageism in the Mass Media For a long time, there were few older women and men in television and in cinema. When older people did appear on screen, it was often in stereotypical roles. In the Oscar-winning film Driving Miss Daisy, for example, Jessica Tandy played an old, lonely woman unable to cope with change.

This pattern has shifted in recent years, partly because the film industry recognizes the increasing profits avail- able from older customers. People of all ages enjoy films. But a larger share of older people, who are less likely to use social media and other computer technology, watch movies. In addition, at theaters, older moviegoers typ- ically spend more money at concession stands. The film industry tracks such patterns and, as a result, a larger number of recent films—including The Grand Budapest Hotel and Book Club—featured older performers including Meryl Streep, Diane Keaton, Jane Fonda, Bill Murray, and Sam Jackson.

caused simply by a patient’s age, a situation described in the Personal Stories box.

Prejudice directed toward the elderly may take the form of many stereotypes—all of them negative— depicting older people as “sick, senile, useless, sexually impotent, ugly, isolated, poor, or miserable” (Palmore, 1998:30–31). Such stereotypes are wrong because most elderly peo- ple are none of these things: About 80 percent of people sixty-five and older live healthy and independent lives, and only about 4 percent of people over the age of sixty-five have health problems that confine them to nursing homes. Most seniors work as hard and as effectively as younger workers, and most employers rate older workers as more trustworthy and loyal. Most elderly men and women are also quite capable of having satisfying sexual relationships (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015); Kaiser Family Foundation, 2015), Federal Interagency Forum on Aging Related Statistics, 2017).

Age-Based Discrimination Prejudice is an attitude that often leads to unfair treatment or discrimination. This is why, back in 1967, Congress passed the Age Discrimination in Employment Act, banning employers from discrimi- nating against people because of their age. Because the average age of the U.S. workforce is going up—in 2017, 68 million workers (44 percent of the total) were age forty-five or older—the number of complaints of age-based discrimination has been rising. In 2017, more than 18,000 complaints of age discrimination were filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2018), which represents a tiny share of actual age discrimination.

PERSONAL STORIES

Is Aging a Disease? A seventy-five-year-old man who loved to square dance suddenly had a sharp pain in his left knee. He went to his doctor to find out what the trouble was. The doctor noted his age, gave his knee a fairly superficial examination, and said, “I can’t find anything obviously wrong with your knee. It must be due to your age.” The man asked the doctor to explain. The doctor launched into a discussion of various theories of aging and how they might explain his knee problem and concluded, “Now do you understand?” The old man replied, “No, I don’t, because my right knee is just as old as my left knee, and it’s not giving me a bit of trouble!”

The medical sociologist Erdman Palmore (1998) tells this story to make a point about subtle forms of ageism. Had this patient been twenty-five years old, Palmore explains, the doctor would never have treated him this way. The doctor

probably would have ordered an X-ray or some other procedure immediately to find out what was causing the pain. But with elderly patients, doctors sometimes engage in a subtle form of ageism by acting as if aging itself were the problem. This response is not good medical practice; it is actually a form of age-based prejudice.

What Do You Think? 1. If it is true that people suffer more illnesses as they age,

what’s wrong with treating aging as a disease?

2. Can you point out other subtle forms of ageism? What about age-related stereotypes?

3. What do you think is a good solution to the problem of age- based prejudice?

180 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

speak out. Many fear that if they were to file a complaint, their abusers might harm them even more or might try to have them institutionalized. For this reason, analysts esti- mate, only about 7 percent of all actual abuse cases are ever reported (Barnett, Miller-Perrin, & Perrin, 1997; National Center on Elder Abuse, 2018).

Causes of Elder Abuse What would cause someone to neglect or abuse an older person? One important pat- tern is that many abusers are themselves victims of abuse. This vicious circle of abuse can be explained in simple terms: People who have experienced abuse in their own lives (often as children) are likely to recreate this pattern in response to the challenge of caring for an aging parent or other person (Greenberg, McKibben, & Raymond, 1990; Bendick, 1992; Barnett, Miller-Perrin, & Perrin, 1997).

People who abuse family members often face other challenges. They may be addicted to alcohol or other drugs, they may have emotional problems, or they may suffer from unhealthy personal relationships. Economic uncertainty adds stress to the lives of many people, a fact that only makes caring for others more difficult. But any person caught within the multiple demands of working, caring for young children, and looking after an aging par- ent may feel out of control and slip into abusive behavior

(Hinrichsen, Hernandez, & Pollack, 1992; Barnett, Miller-Perrin, & Perrin, 1997).

Abuse also occurs in institutional settings such as nursing facilities.

Sometimes this problem results from efforts to cut costs. For exam- ple, nursing home owners may try to operate their businesses with fewer workers or replace nurses with less trained aides. As a result of such policies, overburdened staff may end up neglecting patients (Manheimer, 1994). Like family members, in other words, staff employees who face patient demands they cannot meet may reach a point of desperation that triggers abuse. The Social

At the same time, older men are seen on screen much more often than older women. Think of the many roles played in recent years by Harrison Ford (now seventy-five) and Clint Eastwood (eighty-eight)—and they usually appear (both on- and off-screen) opposite women half their age. Now in their fifties, Tom Cruise, Johnny Depp, Brad Pitt, and George Clooney usually pair up with actresses who are twenty or more years younger than they are. Meryl Streep recently commented that, in the film industry, women face increasing challenges landing major roles after they reach even the age of forty (Guo, 2016).

Race, too, figures into the way older people are pre- sented by the mass media. Older people who do appear in the mass media are likely to be white. An increasing number of African Americans are on television and in the movies, but they are typically young people. Again, there are excep- tions to the rule. Think about the popular actor Samuel Jackson, who starred in five films in 2018, the same year that he turned seventy. In general, however, minorities become increasingly invisible once they pass the age of sixty-five.

Victimization of the Elderly Only in the 1980s, with the increasing political power of older people, did our society begin to define elder abuse as a social problem. Elder abuse refers to a range of behavior that extends from passive neglect to active verbal and emotional mistreat- ment to life-threatening physical vio- lence. Experts estimate that about one in ten older people (about 5 million) suffers some abuse each year, with about one-third of these cases involving serious, life-threatening abuse.

According to the fed- eral government, half of all cases of elder abuse involve neglect of older people who cannot care for themselves. The remaining half involves a range of harmful actions, including active physical or psychological abuse (but rarely sexual abuse), wrongfully tak- ing an older person’s money, or unfairly taking some other prop- erty (Thompson, 1998; National Center on Elder Abuse, 2018).

Like other forms of family violence (discussed in Chapter 13, “Family Life”), elder abuse often goes unreported for the sim- ple reason that victims are afraid to

About one in ten elders (about 5 million people) in the United

States is a victim of abuse every year. Countless others suffer from neglect and from treatment that robs them of their dignity. What are some of the causes of this problem? What do you think should be done about it?John Birdsall/The Image Works.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 181

medical appointments, and doing housework and cooking for an older person. Most of the hands-on care for an aging person is typically provided by one particular family mem- ber. Most caregivers are women, typically a wife, daughter, or daughter-in-law.

The demands of elder care can be great. Most care- givers have other family members to think about—and, of course, their own needs as well. In addition, three-fourths of all caregivers have jobs. Typically, then, a caregiver pro- vides help for several hours a day on top of what is already a full day’s work. Not surprisingly, providing elder care can be stressful. But research shows that while one-third of caregivers confirm feeling stressed, 88 percent say that pro- viding care is rewarding (Himes, 2001; AARP Public Policy Institute, 2009; Pew Research Center, 2015).

There is little doubt that the elder demand for caregiv- ers will increase beyond the available supply of workers. Some analysts predict that technology will emerge to fill at least some of this unmet demand. Technicians are already in the process of developing robots that will be able to perform many of the caregiving tasks conventionally done by human caregivers. Of course, the experience of interpersonal inter- action would be absent, which is probably the main reason surveys find that only about 40 percent of older people express any interest in robot care (Smith & Anderson, 2017).

Policy box describes a government investigation of nurs- ing home abuse.

The Growing Need for Caregiving As the share of the population over age sixty-five increases, so does the need for elder care. Most elders never live in a nursing home or other care facility. Most elder care- giving, therefore, comes from other individuals. Some 43  million U.S. adults provide care for someone over the age of sixty-five. Understandably, then, sociologists are interested in caregiving, informal and unpaid care provided to a dependent person by family members, other relatives, or friends (Lund, 1993; Spillman, 2002).

Surveys show that more than half of adults who have one or more aging parents provide regular assis- tance involving doing errands, performing housework, or making home repairs. About one-third report providing an elder parent with financial assistance (Pew Research Center, 2015; Family Caregiver Alliance, 2016).

Today, middle-aged adults are a “sandwich genera- tion” who may well spend as much time caring for their aging parents as they did raising their young children. Caregiving ranges from consulting the internet or speak- ing with physicians about drugs, helping people get to

SOCIAL POLICY

Nursing Home Abuse: What Should Be Done? Few people disagree with the idea that society’s oldest members deserve their fair share of kindness. Yet investigations show that, between 2013 and 2017, 6,500 nursing homes—roughly four in ten—were cited for at least one serious violation of federal health and safety standards (Bau, 2017).

The details of abuse cases can be heartbreaking. One witness before a congressional committee was Leslie Olivia, who had been caring for her aging mother at home. When her mother’s needs became greater than what Olivia could manage, she turned to a nursing home for help. Within months of her mother moving in, Olivia discovered that her mother suffered bruises, bedsores, and a broken pelvis. Sometimes attendants simply left a meal tray at the end of her bed, out of reach. Without adequate nutrition, her mother quickly lost weight. Olivia was so concerned that she moved her mother to another home. But problems continued, and her mother soon suffered from bedsores and severe dehydration. Olivia moved her mother yet again.

In the last of the homes, the staff called Olivia to report devastating news—her mother had choked to death on her food. In light of what had happened at the other nursing homes, Olivia was not sure that she should believe them. She soon learned

that at the time of her death, her mother had been attached to a feeding tube. Clearly, the facts pointed to abuse.

Is this disturbing story an isolated case? Based on testimony by family members and also nursing home workers, the congressional committee concluded that elder abuse occurs much more frequently than we like to think and is commonly covered up (Thompson, 1998; U.S. House of Representatives, 2001; Pear, 2008).

Available evidence suggests that elder abuse is especially likely to occur in facilities that are understaffed and where employees are underpaid and have little training. As a result, tens of thousands of our society’s oldest members are suffering needlessly, and many are in danger.

What Do You Think? 1. Why do you think the public is not more concerned about

the problem of elder abuse?

2. What changes in the operation of nursing homes might pre- vent cases like that of Leslie Olivia’s mother?

3. Have you had any experiences with elder abuse in care facilities? If so, explain.

182 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

itself, with income falling as people get older and enter old age.

The poverty rate shows something of an opposite pattern. The highest rate of poverty— about 18 percent—is among children under the age of eighteen. By contrast, the rate falls to 8.6 percent among people ages sixty-five to seventy-four. Then, with advancing age, the pov- erty rate rises, reaching 10.2 percent for people seventy-five and older. If we take all people over the age of sixty-five together, the poverty rate is just 9.3 percent, well below the figure of 12.7 percent for the country as a whole (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Housing Between 2015 and 2035, the U.S. elderly pop- ulation will increase by more than 20 million. Projections indicate that, by 2035, one-third of

all U.S. households will be headed by someone who has reached the age of sixty-five. According to social service providers, our nation will not have enough suitable hous- ing for these numbers of elderly people (Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, 2016; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

In the United States, nearly everyone, young or old, views keeping a home as one key to an independent and happy life. About 91 percent of today’s older men and 81 percent of older women live independently alone or with spouses. About 80 percent of elders own their own homes, and most own them mortgage-free. Even so, older home- owners pay taxes and cover the costs of utilities, insur- ance, and home maintenance, all of which can leave elders asset rich but income poor (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015; Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, 2016; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016).

Most elders prefer to “age in place,” staying in the same homes they occupied while working and raising their children. Physical changes that occur in old age— including a loss of strength, a slowing of reaction time, and a weakening of eyesight—require safety modifications to a home. Stairways are a challenge commonly found in homes occupied by older people. But only a small share of this housing has safety and accessibility features such as grab bars in bathrooms (38 percent), entry-level bedrooms (36 percent), wide doorways that will accommodate walk- ers and wheelchairs (12 percent), and accessibility ramps (1 percent) (Pew Research Center, 2015; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and U.S. Census Bureau, 2015).

As you might expect, the houses owned by seniors tend to be older than average. Many of these homes need maintenance and repairs, lack insulation, and require

All of us, as we grow older, will require care from others. How does being poor affect your options for receiving care?

Poverty In 2016, government data showed that 9.3 percent of people over age sixty-five—or about 4.4 million women and men— were living below the government’s poverty line. This fig- ure represents a dramatic change from several generations ago: Back in 1965, the elderly poverty rate in the United States was almost 30 percent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

What accounts for this long-term decline in elder poverty? The main reason is that seniors now receive bet- ter retirement benefits, such as Social Security payments with automatic cost-of-living adjustments. The reduc- tion of poverty among the elderly is a success story that shows that, with effective policies, social problems can be improved. But, of course, there is still much to be done.

Keep in mind that government poverty statistics do not count the relatively small share of elders who are insti- tutionalized, most of whom are poor. Also worth noting is that the 2016 poverty line for a person over sixty-five living alone was $11,511, a number lower than the poverty line of $12,486 for a younger person living alone. Therefore, the official poverty rate for elders almost certainly understates the actual extent of the problem (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Age Stratification Age stratification is social inequality among various age cate- gories within a society. As explained earlier, in preindustrial societies elders have more wealth and power than younger people. In modern industrial societies, the opposite is true.

Figure 6–2 shows the average income and the poverty rates for the U.S. population according to age categories. In our society, as people get older, gaining education and experience, their income typically goes up. This trend holds from young adulthood through middle age and income peaks about the age of fifty. Then the trend reverses

R ob

in N

el so

n/ P

ho to

E di

t, In

c.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 183

Age of Head of Household (in years)

M ed

ia n

H o

u se

h o

ld In

co m

e

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

15–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–59 60–64 65–69 70–74 751

U.S. average: $59,039

$41,655

$60,932

$77,213

$70,708

$60,065

$53,163

$44,670

$74,481

$31,313

Diversity Snapshot Figure 6–2 U.S. Household Income and Poverty Rate, by Age, 2016

In part (a), we see that median household income typically rises over the life course, peaking at around age fifty and falling as people enter old age. Part (b) shows that poverty rates go down as people get older, reaching a low point for people between the ages of sixty-five and seventy-four, and rising among people who have passed the age of seventy-five.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

10.9%

Pe rc

en ta

ge in

P ov

er ty

18.0%

16.1%

12.5%

9.8%

11.1%

8.6%

10.2%

0%

2%

6%

4%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

20%

18%

Age Category (in years)

Under 18

Years

18–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–59 60–64 65–74 75 and older

9.2%

U.S. Average: 12.7%

improvements to heating and air-conditioning systems. Homeowners most likely to face such problems are the categories of elders at higher risk of poverty: African Americans, women, and rural as well as inner-city people.

Housing that is not up-to-date is not safe. This means that the risk of accident or injury goes up. For example, a fall on dangerous stairs may cause a broken hip, landing an otherwise healthy person in a hospital or nursing facil- ity. Trying to heat a drafty home with a space heater raises the risk of fire or death by asphyxiation. Government pro- grams such as Medicare can help make housing safer by paying for some nonmedical equipment, such as safety seats for showers and tubs. But many elders are unaware of the federal programs that can help make their home life safer (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2018).

Access to shopping and services is another issue important to seniors. Suburban communities typically have limited public transportation, so traveling around the area demands the use of an automobile. Yet many older people no longer drive. The recent spread of car services by Uber and Lyft has increased mobility for many older people. But many aging people—especially in rural areas and small towns—find that stores, businesses, churches and synagogues, and recreational facilities are out of reach.

In a classic study of a declining neighborhood in southern California, Barbara Myerhoff (1979) found that elderly residents wanted, more than anything, to stay inde- pendent. But dressing, shopping, cooking, and cleaning an apartment are not easy for those challenged by arthritis or

failing eyesight. Myerhoff discovered that the neighbor- hood had no large grocery store, forcing residents to take the bus to a shopping center. But the bus had high steps that were hard to climb and prevented older shoppers from taking a wheeled shopping cart. Such was the chal- lenge of daily life.

Housing Programs for Older People Across the United States, there are thousands of retirement communities that offer comfortable, accessible apartments with on-site health care services and help with cleaning, meals, and transportation. But the costs of living in such communities are high, typically between $2,500 and $7,000 per month for an apartment and meals. In addition, many such facilities require residents to pay up-front entrance fees of as much as $250,000. Clearly, such high cost puts this type of hous- ing within reach of a very limited number of older people.

To make safe, accessible housing available to those with lower incomes, the federal government provides seniors with rental subsidies based on the individu- al’s need. Elderly people occupy 30 percent of the 1 mil- lion public housing units. In 1990, Congress passed the National Affordable Housing Act, providing additional support to frail elders, a population that will increase quickly in the years to come as more seniors live past age eighty-five (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2018).

Passage of the National Affordable Housing Act also made available so-called “reverse mortgages,” which are financial arrangements that allow qualified elders to borrow

184 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

with assistance through Medicare, a program that pays for hospital care and other medical costs for people over age sixty-five. In 2003, Congress added a program to help pay for prescription drugs to Medicare coverage. However, Medicare has high deductibles and co-pay requirements, dental care is extra, and long-term care is not included (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2012).

The cost of medical care has been rising steadily in the United States. In 2016, Medicare spending for elderly peo- ple reached $675 billion, a figure that will likely double in the next decade. Seniors spend about 15 percent of their household budget on health care, nearly double the share among younger people. To help pay the health care costs not covered by Medicare, 53 percent of elders purchase private health insurance. But even with additional coverage, many seniors face challenges in paying the bills because health costs rise so much in old age (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2016; Cubanski & Neuman, 2017).

The greatest financial challenges are faced by elders who move to a nursing facility. Although, at any given time, just 4 percent of U.S. elders live in a nursing facility, almost half will do so at some point. Here again, Medicare and private insurance typically pay only some of the costs, and the rest can easily overwhelm anyone who is not wealthy (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2015).

Death and Dying Sooner or later, we all face the reality of death. One of the most important challenges of growing old is coming to terms with the end of this life.

How people think about death and dying is shaped by culture. In low-income nations, many infants die at birth, and as many as half of children die before reaching their teenage years. With few medical professionals available, family members care for one another in times of illness. Commonly, then, people in low-income nations die in the company of family and friends, and these cultures accept death as a common part of everyday life.

In high-income nations, however, scientific medicine provides greater control over health. As trained profession- als come to dominate health care, death is no longer part of most people’s everyday lives. Have you ever seen a person die? For most of us, the answer is no because family mem- bers and friends who are approaching death are whisked away to die behind closed doors in the company of med- ical specialists. Even in hospitals, morgues remain out of sight for most patients and visitors (Ariès, 1974; Lee, 2002; Pew Research Center, 2013).

In our society, professional morticians rather than fam- ily members do the work of preparing bodies for burial or cremation. Most of our death rituals take place not in fam- ily homes but in the facilities of the funeral industry.

against their home equity without making any monthly payments. Elders can use the cash as they wish—say, for home repairs, medical care, or housekeeping services. Eventually, after the person dies or moves elsewhere, the house is sold and the loan is paid back from the proceeds. This policy can turn the value of a home into cash needed for daily living. Even so, many seniors are not comfortable borrowing against their most important financial asset.

Finally, many elders who face the high cost of housing with declining income cut costs by sharing a home. About 13 percent of U.S. seniors live with a relative or an unre- lated adult (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

Medical Care As people grow old, they need much more medical care. Since 1965, the federal government has provided elders

Many elderly people prefer to remain in familiar homes. But homes that were comfortable for middle-aged people can become challeng- ing to those who are entering old age. Alterations to make a home suitable for an older person can be very expensive, and alternatives such as moving to a retirement community can be more expensive still. Do you think U.S. society should expect individuals to meet these challenges for themselves?

K ab

lo nk

/G ol

de n

P ix

el s

LL C

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 185

Euthanasia in Europe Since 1981, the Netherlands has permitted active euthanasia under specific circumstances. Under Dutch law, patients can request euthanasia if they are dying with no hope of recovery, are suffering, and understand the medical options that are available. The participating doctor, in turn, must consult with another physician before acting to end a life (Tagliabue, 2008; Reuters, 2010). Dutch authorities report that about 6,000 people a year die with a physician’s help, which represents about 4 percent of all deaths (DutchNews.nl, 2018). These are the official statistics. Because many cases are never reported, the actual number of cases may be twice as high.

Most people in the Netherlands support this pol- icy of active euthanasia. Yet there is evidence that doc- tors do not always follow the rules. Critics point out that Dutch doctors assist in the deaths of people who, due to their illness, cannot clearly state that they want to die. In other cases, physicians assist in the deaths of people with mental disorders who claim they wish to die. In all these cases, doctors assist in bringing about death with the belief that ending a troubled life is in the patient’s best interest, and the event may or may not be reported to the govern- ment (Gillon, 1999; Barr, 2004; Carey, 2016). In addition to the Netherlands, in recent years, Belgium, Luxembourg, Switzerland, Germany, and Canada have enacted similar laws, and active euthanasia is under discussion in other nations.

Debate is most intense about whether euthanasia can be performed on people who are not terminally ill.

It is probably fair to say that U.S. culture treats death as a topic to avoid. However, a new social movement, with elders leading the way, is trying to bring death and dying out in the open, raising some important questions that we now examine.

Euthanasia and the Right to Die Higher living stan- dards and advanced medical technology mean people now live far longer than they did in the past. Modern life also transforms death from an event into a decision. In other words, more and more deaths in the United States result from a deliberate decision to cease life-extending treatment.

In recent decades, a right-to-die movement has devel- oped, claiming that dying people—rather than doctors and hospital personnel—should decide when, where, and how people die (Morris, 1997; Ogden, 2001). It may not be pos- sible to escape death, but the right-to-die movement claims that people with terminal diseases should be allowed to guide the process of dying and, if they wish, to ask others for help in bringing about their deaths. This policy is called euthanasia (from Greek words meaning “a good death”), assisting in the death of a person suffering from an incurable disease.

Euthanasia has two forms. Passive euthanasia involves doctors ending the treatment of a terminally ill person by, say, turning off respirators or other life-support machines. Passive euthanasia is generally accepted by lawmakers and is widely practiced by doctors. An increasing number of people expect to invoke passive euthanasia and have made their intentions known. More than 60 percent of U.S. adults say they have talked to another person about their wishes, and 35 percent of all U.S. adults including 60 percent of those over the age of sixty-five have a living will that states which treatments they do and do not want if they are facing death and are unable to speak for themselves (Pew Research Center, 2013; Lipka, 2014).

Active euthanasia, by contrast, involves a physician or other party actively bringing about a person’s death. For example, a doctor might administer a lethal injection to a dying person to bring a painless end to life.

A middle ground between pas- sive and active euthanasia is called physician-assisted suicide. In this case, a patient requests help in dying from a physician, who typically writes a pre- scription for lethal drugs. The doctor does nothing more, and the patient decides if, when, and where to take the drugs.

B A

X TE

R /B

S IP

S A

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Public support for the claim that people have a right to die is increasing. Do you think peo- ple who are being kept alive by machines should be allowed to request that the machines be turned off? What about allowing a physician to prescribe lethal drugs that a terminally ill patient can choose to use?

186 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

wishing to avoid high medical bills, will encourage an old or sick parent to seek an end to life? How could we be sure that health insurance companies won’t weigh in to encour- age active euthanasia, knowing that they will earn bigger profits if patients opt to end their lives rather than continu- ing with months of expensive treatments? Finally, what about the poor? Many doctors and hospitals already view poor patients and people without health insurance as finan- cial liabilities—would they not try to save money by “get- ting it over with”? In short, critics point to the difficulty of setting clear moral guidelines for euthanasia and insist that it will be even harder to prevent abuse (Kleinman, 1997).

Are we on a slippery slope that will increase physician- assisted suicide? There has been no breakout of cases in states where this policy is lawful. At the same time, the number of states enacting such laws is increasing and now includes more than one-sixth of the U.S. population. As the elder population of the country rapidly increases, and med- ical costs continue to rise, the euthanasia debate is sure to intensify.

Hospice Another important development affecting pat- terns of death is the increasing use of hospice, homelike care that provides physical and emotional comfort to dying people and their families. The first hospice facility in the United States opened in 1974. The Defining Moment feature describes the work of Cicely Saunders, who helped found the hos- pice movement.

Today, more than 6,100 hospice organizations care for more than 1.6 million people each year. About two- thirds of all hospice facilities in the United States focus on providing care for elderly people nearing the end of their lives. Unlike a hospital, where medical person- nel work to save lives and restore health, a hospice staff helps people die in comfort and with dignity. Hospice care involves medical care including pain management and also emotional and spiritual support for the dying person and family members. Some hospice organizations operate homes where dying people go to spend their final days; more often, hospice workers go to the homes (or residential facilities) of dying people to assist them and their families (National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, 2018).

The growth of hospice reflects the fact that many peo- ple want to avoid the impersonal and highly regimented environment of a hospital. Typically, hospice personnel work with a doctor and family members to be sure that the dying person is comfortable, using drugs as necessary to control pain but making no efforts to extend life unnatu- rally. The work of hospice is to help the patient and family members accept death in an environment that is as com- fortable as possible.

Should severe mental illness be grounds for assisted sui- cide? What about other disorders that lead people to wish to die? In 2012, a Belgian physician euthanized two brothers at their request. These men were both deaf and decided they wished to die after learning that they were also going blind. The physician defended the action as a proper response to patient suffering. Critics, however, fear that people may be pressured into choosing death by phy- sicians or family members who are weary of providing care (Goldman, 2013).

Euthanasia in the United States The right-to-die debate continues in the United States, with people lining up to support or oppose active euthanasia. In 1997, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled (in Vacco v. Quill and Washington v. Glucksberg) that the Constitution does not recognize a right to die. This decision slowed the right-to-die move- ment that is seeking legalization of active euthanasia and supports the spread of physician-assisted suicide. The state of Oregon passed a “death with dignity” law in 1997 permitting physicians to assist people in dying if the patients are judged to have less than six months to live. The number of cases of physician-assisted suicide in Oregon has steadily increased, especially since 2014. But the numbers remain fairly low with about 1,100 cases since the law was passed and 132 physician-assisted sui- cides in 2015 representing 0.4 percent of all deaths (The Conversation, 2017).

In 2008, the state of Washington also enacted a law permitting physician-assisted suicide, as did Montana in 2009, Vermont in 2013, California in 2015, and Colorado in 2016. In 2018, an additional twenty-four states were con- sidering enacting physician-assisted suicide (Pew Research Center, 2013; Oregon Public Health Division, 2016; Death with Dignity, 2018).

The right-to-die movement remains controversial. Supporters claim that most people favor having a choice about when and how to die, and many people will welcome help from a doctor to bring about a “good death.” National surveys show that 73 percent of people in the United States do support terminally ill people receiving help from doc- tors in bringing about a good death (Gallup, 2017).

Critics of the right-to-die movement claim that the physician-assisted suicide laws create a “slippery slope” that will encourage more and more assisted suicide. How could we be sure, for example, that a request to end a life is not prompted by depression or desperate loneliness on the part of the patient? Surveys confirm widespread concern that doctors not assist in the death of people who are sim- ply tired of living (Gallup, 2015; Smith et al., 2015).

And what of pressuring people to die? Isn’t it likely that family members, perhaps eager for an inheritance or

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 187

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment A Good Death: Cicely Saunders and the Birth of Hospice Living in London during the height of the Industrial Revolution was not easy. Poverty was widespread, disease was common, and people moved about in a world teeming with strangers. With so many problems facing the living, why would anyone take time to think about people who were dying?

Cicely Saunders (1918–2005) was a nurse and physician who grew up in London early in the last century. She had struggled with her own illness and was motivated by a strong desire to help others. From her years of working with patients in hospitals, Saunders viewed illness not just as a medical or biological event but also as a social experience. Therefore, she fashioned her job into what we might call a medical social worker.

In 1948, Saunders began work with a patient, a refugee who had fled Poland for London during World War II. The two eventually became very close, but their personal relationship was doomed by the fact that the man was dying of cancer. During the time that they spent together, Saunders and he spoke about how dying people typically do not get what they need from hospitals, which, after all, were created with the goal of curing illness.

Dying people, Saunders concluded, have special needs that call for a new type of care center. This thought developed into the idea of hospice, a place where people will find the means to control pain and the compassionate care that can make their final stage of life as comfortable and peaceful as possible. In addition, Saunders learned from her patients, dying people need help in addressing their fears and in bringing closure to their lives. The vision of hospice can be summed up as palliative care, which involves helpfully addressing a dying person’s symptoms and responding to their physical, emotional, social, and spiritual needs.

As her ideas came together, Saunders also completed her medical training. Based on her vision of hospice care, in 1967 Saunders founded St. Christopher’s Hospice in London, the first

facility devoted completely to the care of dying people. In the United States, the first hospice facility opened in 1974. Today, more than 1.6 million people in this country receive hospice care each year, which represents about 45 percent of people who die.

In 1979, Queen Elizabeth II recognized the efforts of Cicely Saunders by elevating her to knighthood. Saunders is celebrated as one who helped change the way the medical profession—and the public—think about dying.

Theories of Aging and Inequality 6.4 Apply sociological theory to issues of aging

and age stratification.

The following sections present structural-functional, symbolic-interaction, social-conflict, feminist, and intersec- tion theories to help explain many of the issues raised in this chapter.

Structural-Functional Theory: The Need to Disengage Structural-functional theory highlights ways in which social patterns help societies to operate smoothly. Faced with the reality that all people grow old and eventually die, societies must develop ways to disengage older peo- ple from productive work just as they must train younger people for future careers. In principle, the solution to the problem of eventual human decline is disengaging

Cicely Saunders was a nurse and physician who believed that our medical system did not serve dying people very well. By founding St. Christopher’s Hospice in London, she helped the world understand the meaning of a “good death.”

Fr an

k B

ar ra

tt /K

ey st

on e/

H ul

to n

A rc

hi ve

/G et

ty Im

ag es

188 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

Symbolic-Interaction Theory: Staying Active Symbolic-interaction theory focuses on the meaning peo- ple construct in their everyday lives. As aging people withdraw from some activities, especially those that are physically challenging, most try to find new things to do. For example, retiring from paid work can lead people to pick up a new hobby, to travel, or to perform volunteer work. Finding new activities is especially important because people in the United States who reach age sixty- five, on average, can look forward to almost twenty additional years of life (Robinson, Werner, & Godbey, 1997; Smart, 2001; Arias, 2015).

Researchers have found that personal satisfaction in old age depends on remaining socially active (Havinghurst, Neugarten, & Tobin, 1968; Neugarten, 1996). Activity theory is the idea that people enhance personal satisfaction in old age by keeping up a high level of social activity. Activity theory also reminds us that older people, like people of any age, have differing needs, abilities, and interests. For this reason, no single policy of disengagement is likely to work well for a diverse population, nor should we expect seniors who choose to withdraw from work to agree on the kinds of activities they will enjoy most. The most healthful living in old age involves both disengagement from some earlier activities coupled to reengagement in new activities according to personal choice (Fox et al., 2017).

EVALUATE

Activity theory highlights the social diversity of older people. But keep in mind that at least some older people are not physically able to maintain a busy schedule. Even healthy elders may find that living in a care facility provides few options for interesting activity. Many seniors with low incomes also face limited choices about how to live.

the elderly, which then allows for transferring work- place roles and other responsibilities to younger people. Disengagement is a strategy to ensure that the aging of the population does not disrupt the performance of important tasks.

Retirement is the main strategy for easing older people out of productive roles when they near the point when they will not be capable of performing them well. Retirement emerges in technologically advanced and rapidly changing societies, where many older workers lack recent knowl- edge and up-to-date skills. By contrast, younger workers will bring to their work the benefits of the latest training. Formally stated, disengagement theory is the idea that mod- ern societies operate in an orderly way by removing people from positions of responsibility as they reach old age.

Disengagement is functional for society as a whole. But it also has personal benefits, providing older people, after years of hard work, with the opportunity to rest, relax, travel, or spend time with family (Cumming & Henry, 1961; Voltz, 2000).

EVALUATE

Disengagement theory provides a strategy for society to maintain its operation even as its individual members eventually grow old and die. The gradual disengagement of elderly people may be functional or necessary for society as a whole, but as critics of this idea point out, giving up a job or other responsibilities is not always good news for older men and women. Many enjoy their work, and most look to their jobs for needed income. Therefore, a criticism of this theory is that dis- engagement of the elderly may carry important personal costs, includ- ing loss of income, loss of social standing in the eyes of others, and rising risk of social isolation. The need for people to remain active and socially engaged in old age points us to symbolic-interaction theory.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING State the basic idea of disengage- ment theory. What is one criticism of it?

Disengagement theory suggests that society gradually removes responsibilities from people as they grow old. Activity theory counters that like people at any stage of life, elders find life worthwhile to the extent that they stay active. As a result, many older men and women seek out new jobs, hobbies, and social activities.

B el

us hi

/S hu

tt er

st oc

k.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 189

reach old age. From a feminist point of view, however, we see that women face greater disadvantages in old age than men. Yes, women do typically outlive men. But women struggle against gender stratification throughout their lives, including when they grow old.

In fact, among seniors, gender-based disadvantages may actually be greater. Recall from Chapter 4 (“Gender Inequality”) that, among all adults who work full time, women earn 81 percent as much as men. Among people between the ages of twenty-five and thirty-four, the gender gap is smaller, with women full-time workers earning 89 percent as much as men. By contrast, among older workers between the ages of forty-five to sixty-four, the gender gap is greater, with women earning just 73 percent as much as men. Finally, among people age sixty-five and older (who may or may not be working), the gender gap in income is greater still, with women receiving 65 percent as much income as men.

What explains women’s greater disadvantage in old age? First, older women are more likely than older men to have worked in low-skill service jobs that provide lower pay and less in the way of pensions and other benefits. Second, older women spent their working lives at a time that defined family responsibilities, such as caring for children and the home, as women’s work, which made it harder for them to join (and remain in) the paid labor force. Finally, today’s older women grew up contending with gender discrimination far stronger than it is today—a time that social norms actually kept many women off the cam- pus and out of many jobs entirely. With less education and fewer occupational opportunities, today’s older women now have lower income than men of the same age.

In the years ahead, with more women than men grad- uating from college, the income disparity between older women and older men will probably decrease. But as long as gender stratification remains, a legacy of lifetime disad- vantage will mean that, in old age, women will inevitably have a harder time than men (Neugarten, 1996; Barth et al., 2017; U.S. Census Bureau, 2017).

EVALUATE

Feminist theory is one type of social-conflict theory that has great importance in sociology. Gender stratification operates at all stages of the life course, so to understand the social standing of the older population of the United States, we must consider gender.

Critics of this approach remind us that, although older women are disadvantaged in relation to older men, the income gap between the sexes has grown progressively smaller over the past century. By the time today’s young women reach old age—especially with a larger share of women than men now earning college degrees—we should expect the social standing of men and women to be more equal.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING Explain what we learn from applying feminist theory to old age. State one criticism of this approach.

In short, people who are disadvantaged in various ways may not be able to shape their lives as they may wish. This concern brings us to social-conflict theory.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING State the basic idea of activity theory. What is one criticism of it?

Social-Conflict Theory: Age and Economic Inequality Social-conflict theory focuses on age stratification, point- ing to ways in which U.S. society limits the opportuni- ties and resources available to elders. By and large, our society gives the most power and the greatest privileges to middle-aged people. As we have explained, modern societies tend to define elderly people in negative terms, giving rise to both prejudice and discrimination. The law bans age workplace discrimination, but companies usually prefer hiring younger workers. Similarly, the law forbids employers from forcing most older workers to retire, but companies are often eager to replace older employees with younger, lower-paid employees as a strategy to control costs. In short, some analysts conclude that, because capi- talist societies value productivity and the pursuit of profit, older people are widely viewed as second-class citizens. In addition, in a society that typically values human beings according to their economic productivity, anyone who withdraws from paid work risks being defined as unwor- thy (Atchley, 1982; Phillipson, 1982).

EVALUATE

Social-conflict theory shows us that age is one important dimension of social stratification. Yet by focusing on the relative disadvantages of some elders, social-conflict theory misses the larger picture that, on average, recent decades have brought major economic gains to seniors. In the United States, the poverty rate for seniors—even those over the age of seventy-five—is actually well below the rate for the society as a whole.

In addition, today’s seniors have a lot of political clout because most of them vote. In the 2016 presidential election, 71 percent of people age sixty-five or older voted, compared with 46 percent of people between the ages of eighteen and twenty-four (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). It is true that some elders live in poverty and that many encounter prejudice and discrimination. But critics of conflict theory claim that the system meets the needs of older people fairly well.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING State the basic idea of social-conflict theory. What is one criticism of this approach?

Feminist Theory: Aging and Gender Feminist theory is a social-conflict approach focused on gender. Sooner or later, the challenges of aging will affect everyone—at least those of us who are lucky enough to

190 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

some elderly women are further disadvantaged by race and ethnicity.

Figure 6–3 contrasts the poverty rate for var- ious categories of the elderly population in the United States. Among non-Hispanic whites over the age of sixty-five, women have a poverty rate (8.1 percent) that is higher than that for white men (5.8 percent). However, African American women (20.6 percent) and Hispanic American women (19.8 percent) have poverty rates that are more than three times higher than those for white men (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). In short, dimensions of social stratification involving gender, race, and eth- nicity combine to shape the lives of older people.

EVALUATE

Intersection theory shows us that older women are a socially diverse category of the population, with some being much better off than others. There is no single type of older woman. Rather, the experience of growing old is shaped not only by gender but also by class, race, ethnicity, and many other factors, including sexual orientation and health patterns.

Although older women are disadvantaged in relation to older men, critics of this approach remind us that the income gap between the sexes has become smaller. By the

time that today’s younger people reach old age, we should expect the social standing of men and women to be more equal.

CHECK YOUR LEARNING What does intersection theory tell us about aging? State one criticism of this approach.

The Applying Theory table sums up what each theo- retical approach teaches us about aging and inequality.

Intersection Theory: Multiple Disadvantages Just as elderly women are socially disadvantaged in rela- tion to elderly men, some categories of women face greater challenges than others. Intersection theory examines the interplay of various dimensions of inequality to show that

P er

ce n

ta g

e o

f P

eo p

le b

el o

w t

h e

P o

ve rt

y Li

n e

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Non-Hispanic Whites

8.1% 7.1%

5.8%

Hispanic Americans

19.8%

17.4%

14.2%

African Americans

20.6%

18.7%

16%

MenWomen Both sexes

Diversity Snapshot Figure 6–3 U.S. Poverty Rates by Race, Ethnicity,

and Gender, Age 65 and Older, 2016

Among people over age sixty-five, Hispanic Americans and African Americans are more than twice as likely to be poor as non-Hispanic whites. In every category, older women are more likely to be poor than older men.

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau (2017).

APPLYING THEORY

Aging and Inequality

Structural-Functional Theory

Symbolic-Interaction Theory

Social-Conflict Theory

Feminist Theory and Intersection Theory

What is the level of analysis?

Macro-level Micro-level Macro-level Macro-level

How do we understand aging?

A structural-functional analysis supports disengagement theory, which claims that modern societies operate smoothly by disengaging people from positions of responsi- bility as they reach old age. Aging, then, amounts to a loss of ability to perform important roles.

A symbolic-interaction analysis supports activity theory, which links satisfaction in old age to keeping a high level of social ac- tivity. Aging is a time of transition during which people disengage from some activities and take on new ones.

Social-conflict theory focuses on age stratification. Society gives most power and privileges to people in midlife. In spite of age discrimination laws, most employers favor younger workers whom they can pay less.

Feminist theory points to the importance of gender stratification in old age. Intersection theory reminds us that dimensions of inequality combine to put some categories of people at greater disadvantage.

Is aging a problem?

Aging is inevitable and causes people to lose their abilities sooner or later. Societies avoid the problem of older people not performing their responsibilities through disengage- ment of the elderly.

The problems of aging can be minimized by remaining active, according to an individual’s abili- ties, interests, and desires.

Many of the problems of aging are caused by our society’s profit orientation, which devalues categories of people who are less economically productive.

Problems of aging are greater for women and other disadvantaged categories of the population who contend with more social problems throughout the life course.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 191

and disciplined savings plan, people will maximize the resources they have available for their old age.

All these policies are consistent with the conservative desire for limited government. Even so, almost all conser- vatives support Social Security, although they point out that unless reforms are made, the current system will run out of money by about 2032. In recent years, conservatives who favor market solutions over government programs argued for allowing people to invest some of their money in private accounts in order to earn a larger return. Such a reform of Social Security was tried by the Bush adminis- tration, but it became politically impossible with the onset of the recent recession. Some conservatives have actually voted to expand government assistance to older people. In 2003, for example, both Republicans and Democrats sup- ported an extension of Medicare to help pay for prescrip- tion drugs.

In general, however, conservatives point to the soar- ing federal deficit and claim that we need to control gov- ernment spending for entitlement programs that provide income for numerous categories of people. As a strategy to save money, some conservatives have called for rais- ing the age for receiving full Social Security benefits in the future, usually with provision that none of today’s seniors (who are very likely to vote) will be affected. Another strategy that finds favor with some conservatives, as well as most liberals, is to limit or even cut off government benefits to well-off seniors who do not need them. In this way, Social Security benefits would target those who need them the most.

The Trump administration has taken a conservative position on seniors. In their efforts to reduce the size and scope of government, federal officials have trimmed bud- gets and reduced some benefits to older people. Support to lower-income seniors to make their homes more energy efficient, for example, has been reduced, as has funding for job-training programs for people over the age of fifty-five. Even the Meals on Wheels program has been targeted for cuts in recent budget proposals (Singletary, 2017).

Liberals: More Government Assistance Liberals reject the conservative claim that families and individuals themselves should provide for older people. Rather, as liberals see it, the primary responsibility for elder care lies with government. Liberals consider this a matter of fairness because many older people—especially those who have faced prejudice and discrimination their whole lives—simply have never had the opportunity to earn the money they need to carry them through old age.

Liberals also remind us that many of today’s working families depend on the earnings of both spouses. Especially during tough economic times, average working families have enough trouble taking care of themselves, never mind

POLITICS AND AGING

Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions 6.5 Analyze aging and age stratification from various

positions on the political spectrum.

As in other areas of social life, exactly how anyone views the social problems involving the elderly is guided by political attitudes. Each political perspective—from radi- cal left to conservative—defines age-related problems and their solutions differently. We begin with a look at conser- vative analysis.

Conservatives: More Family Responsibility Surveys show that a majority of U.S. adults believe that families and individuals themselves should have primary responsibility for people in old age (Pew Research Center, 2015). This is a conservative position because, as conser- vatives see it, a healthy society is built not on government looking after everyone (at the cost of personal freedom) but on personal responsibility. The social group that instills this sense of responsibility and cares for its members is the family.

Conservatives also claim that our society’s families have been getting weaker. In an age that celebrates indi- vidualism and independence, they say, the age-old system by which family members take care of their own is break- ing down. This trend toward family decline is especially troubling because the elderly population is increasing and caregiving is now more necessary than ever. Weakening families is the conservative explanation for a number of social problems faced by older people, including social iso- lation, elder abuse, and poverty.

Women and men today are living longer and longer, which is good news. But this same trend also means that many families that are raising children also find themselves having to care for aging parents. As conservatives see it, this is as it should be. But, conservatives argue, to face these challenges, we must reject a “me first” culture that makes many younger people less willing to take on family responsibilities. Here, conservatives part ways with femi- nists, claiming that feminism encourages women to view family life as less important than the workplace (Sommers, 2003).

Another important dimension of individual responsi- bility is planning for the future. Conservatives argue that people of all ages should plan ahead for retirement through a program of saving and investment. With a long-term

192 Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality

society. Understanding the culture of capitalism helps us to see why people typically define the elderly in negative terms and push them to the margins of society.

From the radical-left point of view, the solution to age- ism and other problems of inequality is to take the radical step of replacing the capitalist economy with one that val- ues all people equally and meets the needs of everyone. In short, according to radicals on the left, a socialist economy would lessen all dimensions of inequality, including age stratification.

The Left to Right table summarizes how each political perspective views age-related problems and solutions.

Going On from Here This chapter has explained that older people suffer from a number of problems, including prejudice and discrimina- tion, social isolation, poverty, and inadequate housing. Over the past two centuries, industrial societies raised living stan- dards for everyone, but they also reduced the social stand- ing of their oldest members relative to the young. Given the current trends, what can we expect the future to hold?

Looking ahead, perhaps the most important fact to keep in mind is the steadily increasing share of elders in the U.S. population. Elders are well organized and very active politically. As noted earlier, people over age sixty-five are much more likely to vote (70.9 percent cast a ballot in 2016) than those ages eighteen to twenty-four (46.1 percent). It is no surprise, then, that politicians pay close attention to the concerns of older people.

The political clout of seniors can also be seen in their improving economic standing. It is true that, as peo- ple move further into old age, income falls and the risk of poverty increases. Yet, in a dramatic change from fifty

providing for older family members. Keep in mind, too, that many younger adults (especially women) come home from a day of work exhausted. Stretched to the limit trying to meet their own needs and the needs of their children, can we really expect people to provide the care needed by family elders?

In addition, few older people want to depend on their children; indeed, the greatest fear of many older people is becoming a burden to others. To help seniors remain inde- pendent, liberals conclude, the solution is not to limit social programs for the elderly but to expand them. Government programs that increase household income, ensure medical care coverage, and make affordable housing available— these are the solutions that would dramatically improve the quality of life for elders and, in the process, help their children. In an age of increasing economic inequality, liber- als claim, government must raise more revenue by taxing those who earn the most and provide a broader safety net for everyone else.

The Radical Left: Capitalism and the Elderly It is fair to say that radicals on the left have paid more atten- tion to inequality based on class, race, and gender than to age stratification. But a left-radical analysis of aging was developed by Steven Spitzer (1980). Following Karl Marx, Spitzer argues that capitalist societies have an overriding focus on profits. For this reason, the culture of capital- ism devalues any category of people that is economically less productive. To the extent that elderly people do not work—and to the extent that elders depend on pensions and other benefits—they are viewed as a costly burden to

Conservatives believe that families should provide care as their members grow old. Liberals look to government to expand social programs that benefit seniors. Which political viewpoint do you think seniors themselves prefer? Why?

D en

ni s

M ac

D on

al d/

P ho

to E

di t,

In c.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 193

unfair burden on the young (Riche, 2000; Gendell, 2002; Andrews, 2005).

As government officials debate the future of Social Security, some critics—especially conservatives—point out that many older people are well-off. They would solve the Social Security problem by letting people set up private investment accounts and reducing benefits to well-off people who do not need government help. Liberals claim that more revenue must flow into Social Security to keep the current system operating so they would increase taxes, especially on the rich. Radicals on the left argue that only basic change to our economic and political systems will produce greater equality for every- one, regardless of age.

Most seniors take an active part in political life and they are keenly interested in any policy that affects them. In the decades to come, of course, it is the younger majority— the elders of tomorrow—who will decide what changes are needed to improve their lives.

years ago, the poverty rate for seniors as a whole (9.3 percent in 2016) is now below that for our society as a whole (12.7 percent) and well below that for young people (18.0 percent).

Still, there are grounds for concern. A major test for our political system will be sustaining the Social Security system by which working people pay into a system that provides benefits to people who have retired. Yet the rapid increase in the elderly population of the United States is placing demands on Social Security as never before. In 1950, there were six workers for every retired person. By 2050, projections indicate that there will be just two workers for every retiree, and most analysts believe that the current system will be bankrupt two decades before then. The strength of Social Security is especially import- ant to African Americans and Latinos, who depend on the system for a larger share of their income in old age than non- Hispanic whites. The challenge is to ensure the financial security of all older people without placing an

LEFT TO RIGHT

The Politics of Aging

Radical-Left View Liberal View Conservative View

What is the problem?

Age stratification is one dimension of the striking social inequality caused by the capitalist U.S. economy.

Elders face a higher risk of poverty as well as prejudice and discrimination based on their age, sometimes in combination with disadvantages based on class, race, and gender.

Although some seniors are poor, in general older people do not face a host of social problems. In the United States, elders are more prosperous and live longer than they did in the past.

What is the solution?

Replacing the capitalist economy with a socialist system would end the practice of devaluing less productive people. Govern- ment must provide for the well-being of people of all ages.

Government programs (including Social Security and laws banning age discrimi- nation) are crucial to meeting the needs of the rising elder population.

A culture of self-reliance will encourage most people to provide for their own old age; families should support elder members as necessary, and government programs should be a last resort.

JOIN THE DEBATE

1. To what extent, as those on the radical left, liberals, and conservatives see it, are U.S. elders disadvantaged? What problems involving the elderly does each political position identify?

2. Compared to inequality based on gender, race, and class, how serious is the problem of age-based inequality? Provide specific facts to support your argument.

3. Of the three political analyses of aging and inequality included here, which do you find most convincing? Why?

194

Whose responsibility is it to support you in your old age?

This chapter has explained that people age sixty-five and older, on average, face declining in- come. Although seniors overall are faring well in relation to younger people, most live on lim- ited budgets even as they face higher costs for food and medical care. How our society should address the needs of the older population, as always, reflects people’s political attitudes. Look at the accompanying photos, which show two general approaches to defining the solution.

Defining Solutions CHAPTER 6 Aging and Inequality

Back in 1935, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt greatly expanded the role of government to include providing much of the economic security people need in old age. When Roosevelt signed the Social Security Bill as a cornerstone of his New Deal, he established old-age pensions funded out of the earnings of younger workers. Today, however, with relatively more older people (receiving bene- fits) and fewer younger workers (paying into the system), Social Security is in danger of going broke. The solution might involve raising Social Security taxes on working people, reducing or eliminating benefits to all elderly people, or cutting back benefits to elders who are well-off. But the idea that the government should ensure everyone’s basic economic security still has strong support from liberals.

B et

tm an

n/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 195

Getting Involved: Applications and Exercises

Shouldn’t you take responsibil- ity for yourself? If you are more conservative, you are likely to see meeting your needs in old age (or, for that matter, at any age) as mostly your own responsibility. We expect people to give and receive support from family members. But, from this point of view, the solution to economic security in old age lies in personal financial planning and disciplined savings, and the earlier you get started, the better.

Hint: Everyone who is lucky enough to live to old age will face the challenge of paying the

costs of housing, food, and medical care. The question that our society wrestles with is

how we should meet this challenge. In general, conservatives claim that individuals should

take responsibility for themselves with assistance, if necessary, from family members. From

this point of view, people must ensure that they will have the resources they need—through

working and a systematic plan to save for their retirement. Liberals claim that self-reliance is

fine for well-off people, but what about those who have not been able to earn enough or who

face lower income as pensions or benefits are cut? From their point of view, a government-

centered approach is best. How conservative or liberal you are on this issue may come down

to this: To what extent do you think people should provide for themselves? To what extent

should this be the responsibility of government? Should higher-income people pay more

taxes to help provide economic security for lower-income people?

1. Talk to someone who grew up in a nation other than the United States. Are there differences in the way peo- ple in that society view old age? What about the role of government in caring for elders?

2. In the 2016 presidential election, if only seniors had voted, Donald Trump would have won in a landslide. If only college-age people had voted, Hillary Clinton would have won in a landslide. Why do you think there is such an age gap in political attitudes?

3. Ask your grandparents or other older people you know about their own experiences with aging. What

do they say are the joys and sorrows of aging? What can they teach you about the experience of retirement?

4. Although there is more attention to death and dying today, this issue is still something of a social taboo. Are there any courses on your campus that deal with death and dying? Is there any organization such as a hospice in your community? If so, contact the organization to discover the range of services it provides.

Tibanna79/Shutterstock.

196

Making the Grade CHAPTER 6 Aging and Inequality

Growing Old

6.1 Explain the effects of industrialization on the process of growing old.

• The life course refers to the socially constructed stages that people pass through as they live out their lives. Gerontology is the study of old age, the final stage in the life course.

Aging is a biological fact of life, but the experience of growing old—and how people define “old”—is shaped by society.

• Preindustrial societies give most wealth and power to elders.

• Industrial societies confer lower social standing on the elderly.

• Corporate downsizing often results in forced retire- ment of older, higher-paid workers.

• Less economic security in recent years has resulted in many people finding themselves financially unable to retire.

Ageism is prejudice and discrimination against older people.

• Ageism involves not just stereotypes but also discrim- ination in employment and housing.

• Ageism in the mass media casts older women and men in negative, stereotypical roles.

Elder abuse, ranging from passive neglect to active verbal, emotional, and physical mistreatment, was recognized as a serious social problem only in the 1980s.

• At least one in ten elders suffers abuse each year, both from family members and from caretakers in institu- tional settings.

The need for caregiving is growing as the share of the U.S population over age sixty-five steadily increases.

• Today’s middle-aged people are a “sandwich genera- tion” who will spend as much time caring for aging parents as they did raising children.

Poverty among elderly people is less common than it was fifty years ago because of improved retirement benefits and Social Security.

• In 2016, 9.3 percent of people over age sixty-five were living below the government’s poverty line.

• A reflection of age stratification in our society, average income rises through middle age, peaks around age fif- ty, and falls as people enter old age.

Safe, accessible, and affordable housing is a concern for many seniors.

• The United States lacks enough suitable hous- ing to meet the needs of this nation’s surging elder population.

The rising cost of medical care is a growing concern for all categories of the U.S. population, but it is most pressing among older people.

• Government programs such as Medicare cover only some of the costs of medical care and nursing homes.

Facing the reality of death and dying is a challenge of growing old.

• Advances in medical technology that extend life now make death a decision; the right of very ill peo- ple to decide when to die is at the heart of the current controversy over euthanasia and physician-assisted suicide.

life course (p.172) the socially constructed stages that people pass through as they live out their lives gerontology (p.172) the study of aging and the elderly gerontocracy (p.173) a social system that gives a society’s oldest members the most wealth, power, and prestige life expectancy (p.174) the average life span of a country’s population

The Graying of the United States

6.2 Discuss the graying of the United States and the social diversity of the older population.

The “graying of the United States” refers to the increasing share of the U.S. population over age sixty-five.

• People sixty-five to seventy-four—the “younger old”—are typically active and in good health.

• “Older old” people—from seventy-five to eighty- four—experience more health-related problems and need more assistance.

• For the “oldest old”—people over eighty-five—stay- ing healthy is the greatest problem.

Problems of Aging

6.3 Assess various problems faced by today’s elderly population.

Social isolation often occurs after retirement or the death of a spouse.

• Social isolation is more common among elderly women, who typically outlive their husbands.

Retirement is an option in industrialized societies because a productive economy means that not everyone has to work.

Chapter 6 Aging and Inequality 197

POLITICS AND AGING Constructing Problems and Defining Solutions

6.5 Analyze aging and age stratification from various positions on the political spectrum.

Conservatives: More Family Responsibility • Conservatives support a society based on strong fam-

ilies in which people take responsibility for their own lives, including their needs in old age.

• Conservatives support a limited role for government in providing assistance to people in old age.

Liberals: More Government Assistance • Liberals point to many problems that challenge people

in the United States as they reach old age.

• Liberals support an expansive role for government in providing assistance to people in old age.

The Radical Left: Capitalism and the Elderly • Radicals on the left criticize capitalism’s empha-

sis on efficiency and profit, claiming that this is why many look down on older people who are no longer economically productive.

• Radicals on the left believe the way to address pover- ty and other problems experienced by the elderly is to create a more equal society for the benefit of everyone.

Theories of Aging and Inequality

6.4 Apply sociological theory to issues of aging and age stratification.

Structural-Functional Theory: The Need to Disengage

Structural-functional theory highlights ways in which social patterns help societies operate smoothly.

• Disengagement theory argues that society must disen- gage elders from important roles, passing responsibili- ties from one generation to the next.

Symbolic-Interaction Theory: Staying Active

Symbolic-interaction theory focuses on the meaning people find in their everyday lives.

• Activity theory states that older people who remain in- volved in many social activities experience greater life satisfaction.

Social-Conflict Theory: Age and Economic Inequality

Social-conflict theory highlights age as a dimension of so- cial stratification.

• Modern societies define elderly people in negative terms, causing both prejudice and discrimination.

Feminist Theory: Aging and Gender

Feminist theory focuses on the importance of gender strat- ification in old age.

ageism (p.178) prejudice and discrimination directed toward older people caregiving (p.181) informal and unpaid care provided to a de- pendent person by family members, other relatives, or friends age stratification (p.182) social inequality among various age categories within a society euthanasia (p.185) assisting in the death of a person suffering from an incurable disease hospice (p.186) homelike care that provides physical and emotional comfort to dying people and their families

disengagement theory (p.188) the idea that modern societies operate in an orderly way by removing people from positions of responsibility as they reach old age activity theory (p.188) the idea that people enhance personal satisfaction in old age by keeping up a high level of social activity

Intersection Theory: Multiple Disadvantages

Intersection theory explains that older women and other minorities are subject not only to ageism but also to sexism and racism.

198

7.5 Apply biological and psychological theories to the issue of crime.

7.6 Apply sociological theory to the issue of crime.

7.7 Analyze crime and violence from various positions on the political spectrum.

7.1 Identify serious crimes as well as trends and patterns in crime rates.

7.2 Define a number of specific types of crime.

7.3 Discuss the causes and consequences of violence in our society.

7.4 Analyze the operation of the U.S. criminal justice system.

Chapter 7

Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Learning Objectives

R ic

ha rd

L or

d/ Th

e Im

ag e

W or

ks .

U .S

. D ep

ar tm

en t o

f D ef

en se

A rc

hi ve

/ A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

R ub

be rB

al l/A

la m

y S

to ck

P ho

to .

Constructing the Problem

Are you safe from crime?

Despite a downward trend in crime rates, about 9 million serious crimes are recorded each year in the United States, and the actual number may be three times as high.

Is violence always wrong?

Our society defines some violence as a problem, but we also rely on violence as a way to solve problems.

Does our criminal justice system guarantee everyone accused of a crime a fair trial?

About 95 percent of people convicted of a crime never stand trial at all but are sentenced through a plea bargain.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 199

Tracking the Trends

High-income nations provide a high quality of life in material terms. But when it comes to violence, some are far safer than others. Between the years 2000 and 2014, most high-income nations did not experience a single mass shooting. Others had one or two. The United States experienced 40 mass shootings resulting in 323 deaths. This total exceeds the death toll in all the other nations combined. Compared with other rich nations, why is the United States a more violent society?

N u

m b

er o

f D

ea th

s fr

o m

M as

s S

h o

o ti

n g

s, 19

76 −2

01 2

(N u

m b

er o

f M

as s

S h

o o

ti n

g s)

0

50

100

150

200

250

400

350

300

U.S. Norway Germany China Finland France Canada Australia

323 (40)

67 (1)

37 (6) 26

(4) 18 (2) 8

(1) 3

(3) 2

(2)

SOURCES: Schildkraut & Elsass (2015); Follman, Aronson, & Pan (2018).

200 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

For the moment, the violence in schools goes on. The de- tails vary from case to case, but there is always pain and suf- fering, always wonder at how something so horrible could happen, and always wounds that kill and wounds that never heal. What is all too clear is that we live in a society that ex- periences a very high level of crime and deadly violence.

This chapter examines the problems of violence and crime in the United States. The chapter begins by address- ing crime—asking what crime is, how much crime takes place, and who the offenders are. Special attention is given to violence, including the violent crime that tears at the hearts of families and causes much fear among the public. Finally, this chapter examines how our society responds to violations of the law through the criminal justice system, and we assess how well this system addresses the problem of crime. We begin by defining several important terms.

Understanding Crime 7.1 Identify serious crimes as well as trends

and  patterns in crime rates.

The following sections provide a comprehensive introduc- tion to the concept of crime. We begin by defining a num- ber of important concepts, including “norm” and “law.” Next, we define “crime” and distinguish two types of crimes—misdemeanors and felonies.

Our understanding of crime will also be informed by statistical measures that indicate the frequency of various specific offenses. This part of the chapter identifies four “crimes against property” and provides data to describe the incidence of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson in the United States. Then attention turns to four types of “crimes against persons” or violent crimes that include murder/manslaughter, aggravated assault, forcible rape, and robbery.

Chapter Overview What are the most serious types of crime? This chapter presents the latest trends in both violent and property crimes. You will learn what categories of people are likely to be arrested as “street criminals,” and you will recognize how people arrested for “street crime” differ from those involved in “organized crime” and “corporate crime.” This chapter also explores the extent of violence in our society and explains why vio- lence is sometimes defined as harmful and sometimes defined as useful. You will carry out theoretical analysis of crime and violence and understand the major justifications for punishment. Finally, you will learn how people’s political attitudes lead them to define certain issues involving crime as problems and to support particular policies as solutions.

Few things are as American as school shootings. During the first half of 2018, on average, an incident involving firearms took place in a U.S. school every week (Ahmed & Walker, 2018).

Certainly, many people fear little will change any time soon. But most of the young people who survived the attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, have not given up. Twenty young people banded together and made use of social media to launch a movement using the hashtags #NeverAgain and #EnoughisEnough. In addition, they organized what they called the March For Our Lives, which took place in cities across the country. Their overall goal is to do what our political leaders have, so far, be unable or unwilling to accomplish—namely, create an effective gun-control policy. Such a policy would include conducting tougher background checks on people seeking to purchase fire- arms, raising the age for people to be able to purchase firearms, and banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. The movement also aims to reduce the power of the National Rifle Association (NRA) to control the gun debate in Congress (Edwards, 2018).

R ob

C ra

nd al

l/S hu

tt er

st oc

k.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 201

over a lifetime, just about everyone living in the United States is victimized by crime (U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 2017). Because crime is so common and widely reported in the mass media, the fear of crime is widespread. In fact, most people think the crime rate has been going up even though official statistics show that it has been going down. For this reason, fear of crime is itself a social problem because it limits the things people do and the places they go. For example, almost one-third of U.S. adults say they are afraid to walk alone at night in their own communities (Smith et al., 2017; Gramlish, 2018).

Crime Statistics Police departments across the country make regular crime reports to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which compiles an annual publication titled Crime in the United States: Uniform Crime Reports (UCR). This report includes data on felonies or serious crimes of two types. The first is crime against property, which is crime that involves theft of property belonging to others. Crimes against property include burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. The second type is crime against persons, crime that involves violence or the threat of violence against others. Crimes against persons include murder and manslaughter, aggravated assault, forcible rape, and robbery. Table 7–1 defines all of these serious crimes.

The remainder of this section of the chapter explains what we have learned about the people who are arrested for committing crimes. The analysis includes attention to offenders’ age, gender, social class position, race, and ethnicity.

Norms, Law, and Crime All societies make rules defining what people should and should not do. Norms are rules and expectations by which a society guides the behavior of its members. Many everyday norms are informal, and people encourage others to con- form to norms by simply making a verbal comment or rais- ing an eyebrow. A stricter type of norm is a law, a norm formally created through a society’s political system. Most laws are enacted by a legislature (such as Congress), although laws also come into being through executive orders (by a local mayor, state governor, or the nation’s president) and through international treaties.

A society’s law includes both civil and criminal stat- utes. Civil law defines the legal rights and relationships involving individuals and businesses. Civil law comes into play when, say, an automobile accident prompts one per- son to sue another to receive payment for loss or damages. Criminal law defines everyone’s responsibility to uphold public order. The driver whose car runs off the road, if found to be intoxicated, is likely to face arrest for a crim- inal violation. So civil law involves claims of harm or loss leading to a financial settlement, and violations of criminal law involve charges of wrongdoing leading to arrest and punishment.

Crime is the violation of a criminal law enacted by federal, state, or local government. Federal laws apply everywhere in the United States, and state and local laws apply within more limited areas or jurisdictions. Crime can be divided into two major categories. A misdemeanor is a less serious crime punishable by less than one year in prison. A felony is a more serious crime punishable by at least one year in prison.

Under our legal system, crime typically involves not only an action (or, sometimes, a failure to act) but also intention. In deciding whether a person has committed a crime, then, a court must establish not only what a person did but also the person’s intent, that is, what the person meant to do. For example, a court can classify a killing in any number of ways, ranging from self-defense (in which someone acts with deadly force but with the intent only to escape serious injury or death) to murder in the first degree (in which someone plans and carries out the killing of another person).

The public sees crime as an important issue. A recent survey found that 58 percent of U.S. adults consider deal- ing with crime to be a “top priority” for our society (Pew Research Center, 2016). Each year, police across the country record more than 9 million serious crimes. At some point

Crimes against Property

Burglary The unlawful entry of a structure to commit a [serious crime] or theft

Larceny-theft The unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession … of another

Motor vehicle theft The theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle

Arson Any willful or malicious burning or attempting to burn … the personal property of another

Crimes against Persons

Murder or nonnegligent manslaughter

The willful (nonnegligent) killing of one human being by another

Aggravated assault An unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury

Forcible rape Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.*

Robbery The taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody, or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear

Table 7–1 Serious Crime in the Uniform Crime Reports

*NOTE: In 2013, this new definition of forcible rape replaced the older definition of rape, which was “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will.” The current definition expands the scope of acts defined as rape and also includes all people (not just females) as victims. Before 2013, the government classified a sexual attack on a male either as an aggravated assault or as some other sexual offense.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice (2017).

202 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Violent Crime: Patterns and Trends Violent crimes, that is, crimes against persons, account for just 14 percent of all serious offenses; crimes against prop- erty account for the remaining 86 percent. Put differently, the crime rate for property offenses is almost seven times higher than that for violent crimes against persons (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). Figure 7–1 shows the rates (the number of reported crimes per 100,000 people) for both crimes against persons and crimes against property.

From 1960 until the early 1990s, the rate of violent crime steadily increased. After that, the trend turned down- ward. (The rate of property offenses also went up after 1960, turned downward in the early 1980s, and continued to decline through 2016.) What accounts for the drop in crime rates? Analysts point to various factors, including a strong economy during the 1990s (although rates have continued to drop during the recent economic downturn). In addition, the downward trend in crime reflects a drop in the use of crack cocaine, the hiring of more police, and tougher sentences for criminal convictions (K. Johnson, 2000; Liptak, 2008). We now take a closer look at trends for each offense covered by the UCR.

The UCR data are certainly useful, but there are two reasons to view these statistics with caution. First, the UCR includes only crimes that are known to the police. But how many crimes are never reported? To answer this question, the FBI conducts the annual National Crime Victimization Survey. Researchers ask a random sample of the U.S. pop- ulation whether they have been victims of serious crime within the past year. A comparison of survey responses with official crime reports suggests that about one-half of violent crimes and just one-third of property crimes are reported to the police. Realistically, then, a complete tally might show that as many as 20 million offenses actually occur each year (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

A second concern is that the UCR gathers statistics on street crimes but not elite crimes, which include busi- ness fraud, insider stock trading, corruption, price fixing, and illegal dumping of toxic wastes. Elite crimes are the offenses more likely to be committed by rich people includ- ing corporate executives. When we put these shortcomings together, we see that the UCR not only underestimates the actual extent of street crime but, with a focus on street crime, gives a biased picture of the typical criminal as well.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020

C ri

m es

p er

1 00

,0 00

P eo

p le

Property CrimesViolent Crimes

Rape

Robbery

Aggravated assault

Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter

All violent crimes

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20202015

Motor vehicle theft

Burglary

Larceny-theft

All property crimes

Figure 7–1 Crime Rates in the United States, 1960–2016

The graphs represent crime rates for various violent crimes and property crimes between 1960 and 2016. “Crime clocks,” shown at the top of the figure, are another way of describing the frequency of crimes.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2017).

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 203

minutes. Efforts by colleges and universities to educate students about “date rape”—sexual assault in which the offender and victim know one another—have encouraged more victims to come forward. Even so, across the coun- try, only about 31 percent of women who are raped make a report to the police. Further, in just one-quarter of reported rape cases do police make an arrest despite the fact that most attackers are known to their victims. One reason for the low arrest rate is that the fear and shame experienced by some women and men discourage them from pursuing prosecution.

The FBI statistics do include attempted rape, but they do not include sex with a minor (typically a per- son under eighteen) when no force is used, which is a crime known as statutory rape. Government data show that about 95 percent of victims of statutory rape are females and almost all the offenders involved are male. Typically, the offender is about six years older than the victim (Troup-Leasure & Snyder, 2005; U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Aggravated Assault Aggravated assault is the most common crime against a person, accounting for 64 per- cent of all reported violent crime. Despite a downward trend in the assault rate after 1991, police recorded 803,007 aggravated assaults in 2016, which works out to one crime every thirty-nine seconds. Police make arrests in 48 percent of reported cases. Aggravated assault is a very male crime: A large majority of both victims and offenders are young men (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).

Robbery Robbery involves both stealing and threatening another person, making this act both a property crime and a violent crime. In 2016, there were 332,198 recorded rob- beries, with one occurring somewhere in the United States every ninety-five seconds. Since 1991, the general trend in the robbery rate has been downward.

Because victims usually do not know the people who rob them, of all violent offenses robbery is the least likely to result in an arrest: In 2016, police cleared just 29 percent of robberies. Again, almost all (86 percent) offenders were males, and most (56 percent) of these men were under age twenty-five. Race is also a factor in robbery: In 2016, African Americans accounted for 54 percent of arrests, whites represented 43 percent, and the remaining 3 per- cent were classified in some other racial category (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Property Crime: Patterns and Trends In 2016, law enforcement agencies across the United States recorded 7.9 million property crimes, which is almost seven times the number of violent crimes. Nationwide, a

Murder In 2016, police recorded 17,250 murders, which means that on average, across the United States, a mur- der took place every thirty minutes. Looking back in time, however, the U.S. murder rate has been falling since 1993, and it now stands at about the same level as it did back in 1960 (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

The FBI also tracks the percentage of murders that are “cleared,” meaning that the police arrested someone for the crime, whether or not that person was later found to be guilty. In 2016, police made arrests in 60 percent of all reported murders (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Most murder victims (78 percent in 2016) and offend- ers (89 percent) are males. African Americans (about 13 percent of the population) are at especially high risk of deadly violence: The FBI reports that 52 percent of murder victims are black, 44 percent are white, and the remainder is of other racial categories. The statistics also show that murder is an intraracial crime, meaning that offenders and victims typically are of the same race. In 90 percent of cases involving an African American victim, the arrested sus- pect is of the same race; this pattern holds for 82 percent of murder cases involving a white victim (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

FBI data show that for murder cases in which the rela- tionship of the victim to the offender could be determined, 79 percent of victims knew the offender. Furthermore, in 26 percent of the cases, victim and offender were actu- ally related. A relationship between the victim and the offender is especially likely when the murder victim is a woman: 36  percent of female victims were murdered by husbands or boyfriends, but just 3 percent of male victims were killed by wives or girlfriends (U.S. Department of Justice, 2015).

Many cases of homicide also include a history of the killer stalking the victim (Lowney & Best, 1995). Stalking is defined as repeated efforts by someone to establish or rees- tablish a relationship against the will of the victim. One study found that 3.3 million people reported being stalked during the past year, which is almost two people in every one hundred. Stalking varies in duration, ranging from a brief experience to five years or more. About 75 percent of all stalking victims are women. Men (in most cases, celebrities) are usually stalked by strangers, but women are almost always stalked by people they know—typically by former husbands or boyfriends. About one-fourth of stalking victims report some type of cyber-stalking. Most stalkers threaten their victims, some vandalize property, some harm or kill pets, and a few end up engaging in deadly violence (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). The Personal Stories box takes a closer look at how stalking came to be defined as a serious social problem.

Forcible Rape In 2016, the FBI recorded 95,730 rapes in the United States, which amounts to one every five-and-a-half

204 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Larceny-Theft Larceny-theft includes familiar forms of stealing such as shoplifting, picking pockets, purse- snatching, taking property from a motor vehicle, and stealing bicycles. Unlike burglary, larceny-theft does not involve “breaking and entering,” and offenders typically commit their crime in a public place and use no force or violence.

Larceny-theft is the most common of all the serious crimes tracked by the FBI and accounts for 62 percent of the total. In 2016, the FBI reported 5.6 million incidents of larceny-theft, which averages one such crime every six seconds. Even after a recent downward trend, the larceny-theft rate in 2016 was 50 percent higher than it was back in 1960. In 2016, the value of lost property from such crimes nationwide exceeded $5.6 billion (an average loss of $1,000 per incident).

In 2016, law enforcement agencies cleared 20 percent of larceny-theft cases. A slight majority of the suspects arrested were male (57 percent), with females making up the rest (43 percent) (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016, 2017).

property crime occurs every four seconds, amounting to an annual loss estimated to be $15.6 billion (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Typically, the victim of a property crime has no direct contact with the offender. Not seeing the offender is one reason that police make an arrest in only 17 percent of reported property crimes compared with 41 percent of reported violent crimes (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). The following sections provide a brief look at each property crime.

Burglary Despite a decade-long decline in the burglary rate, there were still more than 1.5 million burglaries in 2016. This translates to one crime every twenty seconds and an annual total property loss of more than $3.6 billion (the average loss per burglary comes to $2,361).

In 2016, police cleared just 13 percent of known bur- glary cases. Of suspects arrested, 81 percent were male and 43 percent of these men were under the age of twenty-five (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016, 2017).

PERSONAL STORIES

Stalking: The Construction of a Problem Have you ever felt waves of fear, knowing that you are in real danger, and yet no one was there to help? That was the experience of a woman we will call Darlene Woodbury. Hers is a story of crime and violence, and it is also illustrates how our society defines a new social problem.

For two years, Darlene Woodbury lived with Richard. Early on, Darlene found Richard to be charming and kind. But gradually he changed, and soon Richard was trying to control her every movement, often erupting in explosive anger when Darlene did anything that displeased him.

Fearing for her safety, Woodbury moved out, stayed with relatives, and steered clear of Richard. But her absence only fueled Richard’s anger, and he repeatedly tracked her down and threatened to harm her if she did not come back to him. Woodbury called the police and explained what was going on. But the police responded that they could not arrest Richard unless he actually became violent.

The threats continued. Again and again, Woodbury called the police. But the police kept insisting that Richard had broken no law and that they could do nothing as long as Richard was “only talking.”

As you can probably guess, the story ends badly. One day, Richard called Darlene Woodbury to say he was leaving town and wanted to pick up some things from her. With a sense of relief, Darlene agreed to meet him in front of her aunt’s house. When Richard arrived, she walked to the street and handed him a box.

Suddenly, he exploded with rage. Darlene turned and ran back toward the house. Richard started his van, drove up over the curb and across the lawn, and ran down Woodbury, crushing her against the house. Her family looked on in horror as bricks from the front of the house tumbled down around her lifeless body.

This murder took place in 1980, when there were no laws requiring police to protect people like Darlene. But in the wake of this and similar incidents across the country, the social movement concerned with domestic violence began claiming that the law should protect victims of what we now call “stalking.” This social movement created a new social problem and, in 1990, California lawmakers passed the nation’s first antistalking law.

Within a few years, all fifty states enacted a similar law. Today, victims of stalkers can get police protection and a court order requiring that people like Richard stay away from them or face arrest and jail (Tjaden, 1997; Tjaden & Thoennes, 1998; U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

What Do You Think? 1. This story illustrates the way society constructs social prob-

lems: What are the key steps in this process?

2. Why do you think no stalking law existed in the United States before 1990?

3. Can you think of other examples of social problems that were constructed in this way? Explain.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 205

Motor Vehicle Theft Here again, the recent trend for this crime has been downward. Yet the number of motor vehicle thefts—including stealing cars, trucks, buses, motorcycles, and snowmobiles—still exceeded 765,000 in 2016. Nationally, one motor vehicle theft took place every forty-one seconds. The FBI estimated losses in 2016 at $5.9 billion (an average loss of $7,680).

In 2016, police cleared just 13.3 percent of motor vehicle thefts. About 46 percent of offenders who were arrested were under age twenty-five, and 79 percent were males (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016, 2017).

Arson Police and fire investigators deter- mine whether a suspicious fire was caused by arson. The FBI does not have data on arson for the entire country, but some studies suggest that millions of cases of arson occur annually and that the rate has remained about the same in recent years. The FBI reports that about half of arsons involved structures (such as houses or businesses) with the remainder fairly evenly split between mobile property (such as cars) and other property (such as fences or crops). The average loss in arson cases came to $14,182 in 2015, typically a much greater loss than in other types of property crime (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).

In 2016, police cleared 21 percent of known cases of arson. Again, of suspects arrested, 80 percent were male, and 43 percent were under age twenty-five (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016, 2017).

“Street Crime”: Who Are the Criminals? Using FBI data, we can “profile” the typical street crimi- nal in terms of age, gender, social class, race, and ethnicity. Keep in mind that this profile is based not on courtroom convictions but on arrest data provided by police.

Age For all offenses, those most likely to be arrested are the young. Arrest rates for both violent crime and property crime peak in the late teens, and the rates fall dramatically among people who have reached middle age. People ages fifteen to twenty-four make up just 14 percent of the U.S. population, but in 2016, they accounted for 32 percent of arrests for violent crimes and 35 percent of arrests for property crimes (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

Gender Men make up about half of the general popula- tion, but in 2015, they accounted for 62 percent of arrests

To what extent does the availability of firearms contribute to this country’s high rate of violent crime? In 2018, after a troubled nineteen-year-old killed seventeen people at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, a strong public reaction against the easy availability of semiautomatic weapons triggered an intense national debate about gun control. Supporters of the constitutional right to bear arms, represented by the National Rifle Association (NRA), consider gun ownership to be a basic freedom. Critics, however, claim that being able to reach for a gun often turns violence deadly, and they oppose the political power of the NRA.

R ob

er t P

ad ge

tt /R

eu te

rs .

for property crimes. This means that police arrest men for property crimes 1.6 times as often as they arrest women. For violent crimes, gender is even more important: Men represent 80 percent of all arrests, four times the women’s share.

Women show up more often in the arrest data for cer- tain crimes: fraud (39 percent of arrests are of women), larceny-theft (43 percent), embezzlement (50 percent), and prostitution (64 percent). In addition, for all seri- ous crimes, the gender gap is narrowing: From 2005 to 2015, the number of arrests of men fell twice as fast as the number of arrests for women (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).

Social Class Because there is no simple measure of someone’s social class, the FBI does not track the class standing of people arrested for serious crime. But socio- logical research has long shown that people of lower social position are involved in most arrests for street crime. Or put another way, the poor are at the greatest risk of arrest (Wolfgang, Thornberry, & Figlio, 1987; Reiman, 1998; Quigley, 2016).

Crime and violence are serious problems in many low-income neighborhoods. But remember that most peo- ple who live in these neighborhoods obey the law. The sociologist Elijah Anderson (1994, 2002) conducted field research in inner-city Philadelphia and found that this

206 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Ferguson, Missouri, which became known across the country after the deadly shoot- ing of Michael Brown by a white police offi- cer in 2014, for every 100 comparable black women, there are only 60 black men. The rest are either dead or  in jail (NewsOne, 2015; Wolfers, Leonhardt, & Quealy, 2015).

Why does race play a large part in the crime picture? First and most important, African Americans have a high poverty rate. About 34 percent of all black children grow up in poverty compared with about 12 percent of white children (U.S. Census Bureau, 2017). For some, a lack of hope for the future breeds hostility toward police and distrust of “the system.” As a result, some young people adopt what Elijah Anderson calls the “code of the streets,” which endorses crime and violence as a way to survive in what they see as an unfair and dangerous society.

The second reason for the high arrest rate among people of color is closely related to the first: More police patrols are located in poor neighborhoods, espe- cially those with high African American populations. Prejudice based on race and class can prompt people to suspect blacks of criminal behavior simply on the basis of skin color (the practice of racial profiling discussed in Chapter 3, “Racial and Ethnic Inequality”). For example, although about the same share of black and white people report using illegal drugs, black people are three times as likely as white people to be convicted of a drug offense and to end up in jail (Cottom, 2014; U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

A third factor linking race and arrest involves fam- ily patterns. Sixty-six percent of black children are born to single mothers compared with 25 percent of white children. Single parents have less time to supervise children. The fact that single mothers typically earn less money adds to family pressures. For these reasons, children who grow up in poor families without fathers are at higher risk for criminality (Piquero, MacDonald, & Parker, 2002; Hamilton et  al., 2015; Annie E. Casey Foundation, 2018).

Once again, when considering the link between crime and race, remember that street crimes are offenses for which police are likely to arrest low-income people. But white-collar crime, corporate crime, and organized crime—all discussed in the next section—typically involve a far larger share of white and wealthy offenders.

Finally, Asian Americans are underrepresented in street crime statistics. Making up 5.7 percent of the pop- ulation, Asian Americans figured in just 1.2 percent of all arrests in 2016. This lower criminality is due to higher

high-crime neighborhood contained mostly decent, hard- working families. Crime rates may be high in such com- munities, but most crime is committed by a small number of repeat offenders.

Keep in mind, too, that the link between class and criminality depends on the type of crime we are talking about. If we consider not just street crime but also the types of financial crimes that occur on Wall Street, the profile of the “common criminal” would include a much larger share of rich people.

Race and Ethnicity Both race and ethnicity are linked to crime rates. With regard to property crime, whites represent 70 percent of all arrests, and African Americans account for 27 percent. In the case of violent crime, whites represent 59 percent of arrests and African Americans 38 percent. In terms of actual numbers, then, most “street crime” arrests involve white suspects. But in proportion to their share of the popu- lation (13.3 percent), African Americans are more likely than whites to be arrested (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

African American men in the United States face a serious problem: Black males are three-and-a-half times more likely than white males to spend time in jail (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). In fact, one recent study found that, on any given day, one in ten black men in their thirties is in jail (The Sentencing Project, 2017). This pattern is sometimes described as the problem of “mass incarceration” or, more simply, “missing black men.” For every 100 white women between the ages of 25 and 54 who are not in jail, there are 99 comparable white men. For every 100 black women in this age category, there are only 83  comparable black men. In the city of

Larceny-theft—including shoplifting—is the most common of all serious crimes tracked by the FBI. In many cases, stealing is motivated by the “kicks” young people get if they are able to beat the system. Because of the high-tech surveillance equipment used by stores today, the odds of getting caught are high. How do you think courts respond to offenders who claim that their actions were “only a game”?

B ill

A ro

n/ P

ho to

E di

t, In

c.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 207

Hate Crimes Hate crimes was not defined as a societal problem until the mid-1980s, when civil rights groups successfully led campaigns for states to pass laws creating this new category of crime (Jenness & Grattet, 2001). By 2018, forty-five states and the federal government had passed statutes that mandate additional penalties for offenses if they also meet the criteria of a hate crime. According to the FBI, a hate crime is a criminal offense against a person, property, or society motivated by the offender’s bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, or ethnicity or national origin. Just thirteen states plus the District of Columbia have hate crime laws that punish bias crimes involving all of the factors included in this definition. In 2009, the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act (named for two victims of hate crimes) gave the federal government the power to investigate and prosecute hate crimes in localities that either had no such laws or were unable or unwilling to apply them.

Beginning in 1990, when Congress passed the Hate Crime Statistics Act, the U.S. attorney general has collected data from law enforcement agencies about bias-motivated crimes. In 2016, the government recorded about 6,121 hate crimes. Figure 7–2 shows that more than half of hate crimes on record (51.9 percent) involve racial bias (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

income levels and also a strong cultural emphasis on fam- ily, discipline, and honor, all of which tend to discourage criminal behavior.

Other Dimensions of the Crime Problem 7.2 Define a number of specific types

of crime.

Although street crimes command the greatest attention from the U.S. public, there are additional types of crime. The following sections address problems of juvenile delin- quency, hate crimes, white-collar crime, corporate crime, organized crime, and victimless crimes.

Juvenile Delinquency Arrest data show that young people play a big part in the U.S. crime problem. Juvenile delinquency is violation of the law by young people (the definition of a “juvenile” var- ies from state to state, but it is generally someone under the age of eighteen). Any violation of criminal law by a young person can lead a court to declare the individual a delinquent. But some laws—such as curfews and tru- ancy statutes that require school attendance—apply to young people but not to adults. Criminal cases involv- ing juveniles are heard in juvenile courts, which focus on helping children straighten out rather than simply punishing them.

Similarly, when punishment is applied to juveniles, incarceration generally extends only to the legal age of adulthood (between eighteen and twenty-one, depending on the state). In addition, the offender is incarcerated at a juvenile detention center rather than in an adult prison. The assump- tion here is that, compared to older offenders, young people are better candidates for reform. Thus, the goal of the juvenile justice system is to protect the community and also to serve the best interests of youthful offenders themselves.

A young person charged with a serious offense, such as robbery or murder, however, may face “adult charges.” This means that the alleged offender is tried in an adult court and, if found guilty, is sen- tenced as an adult, held in a juvenile detention cen- ter until the legal age of adulthood, and then trans- ferred to an adult prison to serve out the rest of the sentence.

In the past, U.S. courts have sentenced young people to death. But in 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that offenders who were under the age of eighteen when they committed their offenses cannot be sentenced to death, whatever their crime.

Race 51.9%

Religion 21%

Sexual Orientation

17.7%

Ethnicity 5.7%

Gender or Gender Identity

2.5% Disability

1.2%

Figure 7–2 Bias-Motivated Offenses, 2016

Although the motivations for hate crimes vary, more than half of all such crimes express racial bias.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2018).

208 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

explained, such cases have often been resolved in a civil court rather than a criminal court. This means that the person accused may have to return what was taken and pay damages but escapes being labeled a criminal and almost certainly will not go to prison. In today’s world, we are all well aware of the Wall Street executives who do bad things—including breaking the law—but never face a judge or jury. Research confirms that white-collar offend- ers often get off easy, so that even those who are convicted in a criminal court often serve no jail time. For example, just 55 percent of embezzlers convicted in the U.S. District Court system received any jail time at all; those remaining were placed on probation or fined (U.S. Department of Justice, 2016).

In recent years, some individuals have been sent to jail for engaging in fraud and other crimes. In 2012, for example, a federal judge sentenced Raj Rajaratnam, who was convicted of securities fraud and conspiracy, to eleven years in prison. Similarly, Lee B. Farkas, who was convicted of fraud in the housing and mortgage scan- dal, received a thirty-year sentence. Even so, in 2017, there were approximately 6,000 white-collar crime pros- ecutions, which represents less than 10 percent of all fed- eral prosecutions. Perhaps, therefore, we should not be surprised to learn that only one of the dozens of CEOs of Wall Street banks involved in the financial crisis that threw the world into recession has gone to jail (Calabresi & Saporito, 2012; Eaglesham, 2012; Irwin, 2013; Eisinger, 2014; TracReports, 2018).

Corporate Crime Business crime involves not just the actions of individu- als working within a company but also the policies and actions of companies themselves. Corporate crime is an illegal act committed by a corporation or by persons acting on its behalf. One example of corporate crime is gross negli- gence: knowingly producing a faulty or dangerous prod- uct. In one well-known case from the 1970s, Ford Motor Company continued to produce the Pinto, a subcompact automobile, despite the knowledge that a rear-end colli- sion could rupture its gas tank, causing a fiery explosion. Even after deadly accidents took place, Ford refused to order a recall that would have saved lives, deciding it would be cheaper to pay the legal claims resulting from future accidents. Eventually, after hundreds of deaths, lawsuits and a public outcry forced the recall and, soon after, also brought an end to the Pinto. But no executive at Ford ever was convicted of criminal behavior (Dowie, 1977; Kitman, 2003).

Sometimes the line between white-collar crime (acts by individuals) and corporate crime (policies carried out by entire companies) is not clear. This is especially likely when the white-collar crimes are committed by

Many—perhaps even most—hate crimes are not reported. For one thing, some police organizations do not record or submit hate crime data. For another, many victims—particularly gay men and lesbians—are reluctant to report their victimization. For these reasons, the prob- lem of hate crimes is surely greater than official statistics indicate.

The odds of becoming a victim of a hate crime are especially high for people with multiple disadvantages, such as gay men of color. Even so, hate crimes can victim- ize anyone: The government reports that in 2016, 12 per- cent of the hate crimes based on race targeted white people (U.S Department of Justice, 2017).

Hate crime laws remain controversial. Critics argue that because acts such as assault are already against the law, special hate crime laws are unnecessary. In addition, because such laws end up punishing people’s attitudes toward others, critics view such laws as a step in the direc- tion of government “thought police,” who try to control not just what we do but also how we think (Sullivan, 2002). Supporters of hate crime laws counter that the government must take extra steps to protect categories of people who are frequent targets of hostility and violence. They argue that because hate crimes don’t just harm a single victim but also inflame entire communities, they should bring more severe penalties.

White-Collar Crime If you watch police “reality” shows on television, it is easy to think that every person arrested for a crime is poor. Of course, this is not the case, although lower-income people are overrepresented in “street crime” arrests. But there is another type of crime that typically involves people who are much better off. White-collar crime refers to illegal activities conducted by people of high social position during the course of their employment or regular business activities. White- collar crime occurs in the offices of banks and corporations and often involves offenders who are important members of a community. As compared with crime on the streets, then, white- collar crime is better described as “crime in the suites.” The case of Bernard Madoff, a jailed felon con- victed of numerous crimes involving swindling investors out of more than $50 billion, provides a good example of white-collar crime.

Edwin Sutherland (1940), who pioneered the study of white-collar crime, noted that crimes ranging from fraud (obtaining money using false information) to insider trad- ing (using restricted company information as the basis for a personal decision to buy or sell stock) to embezzlement (illegally taking money from one’s employer) are far more common than people imagine.

Sutherland pointed out that the public typically pays little attention to white-collar offenses. Historically, he

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 209

In the decades since then, with the expansion of the global economy, organized crime has also become multina- tional in scale. The Social Problems in Global Perspective box takes a closer look.

Victimless Crime Victimless crimes are offenses that directly harm only the per- son who commits them. Sometimes called public order crimes, victimless crime includes gambling, prostitution, public drunkenness, drug use, and vagrancy. These activities are against the law because they violate conventional norms and values, although people who engage in these things may not think of them as wrong. Still, victimless crimes can and do cause harm. For example, a large share of prostitutes fall victim to violence at the hands of clients or pimps. In the same way, many “johns” who visit prostitutes are infected with sexually transmitted diseases that they pass on to their wives or others.

Laws regulating the activities that are commonly considered to be victimless crimes vary from place to place. In most places, gambling is against the law, although thirty-nine states permit gambling in casinos, at racetracks, or on Indian reservations (American Gaming Association, 2017). Prostitution is illegal everywhere except for parts of rural Nevada. The purchase or pos- session of marijuana is now legal in California, Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, Colorado, Washington, Alaska, Oregon, and the District of Columbia. Twenty additional states are now considering laws that would legalize mar- ijuana. Twenty-nine states have already enacted medi- cal marijuana laws that permit the purchase and use of marijuana under supervision of a physician (National

top leaders in a company. The Enron corporation, which misstated its profits and losses to raise its stock price, eventually was forced to declare bankruptcy in 2001, and nineteen former executives subsequently pleaded guilty or were convicted of crimes. These convicted executives can be viewed as white-collar criminals, but the Enron collapse as a whole is also a case of corpo- rate crime.

However we understand corporate crime, the losses it causes in the United States run into the hundreds of billions of dollars. The Enron case alone involved losses exceeding $50 billion. Bernie Madoff’s investment Ponzi scheme cost about $65 billion. The losses involved in the collapse of the banking system in the last recession were far greater still, leading to government bailouts of well over $1 trillion. For most of us, numbers this high are difficult to fully comprehend. But the simple fact is that the cost of white-collar and corporate crime is far greater than the costs of all the property crimes described earlier in this chapter. In terms of financial losses, white-collar and corporate offenses are the heart of this country’s crime problem (Reiman, 1998; Lavella, 2002; Deehan, 2015).

Organized Crime Organized crime is a business operation that supplies illegal goods and services. Such businesses profit from selling any number of goods and services that people want—including gambling, sex, and drugs—in violation of the law.

Organized crime in the United States expanded greatly during Prohibition (1919–33), when the federal government outlawed the manufacture and sale of alco- holic beverages throughout the United States. The ban on alcohol allowed the Mafia, also known as La Cosa Nostra (Italian for “our thing”), to gain wealth and power by illegally importing, producing, and distributing liquor to an eager public. With so much money to be made, crim- inal gangs—made up of people in just about every eth- nic category—commonly protected their interest by using violence against members of opposing gangs as well as to frighten law enforcement officials and the public as a whole.

After Prohibition was ended, members of organized crime continued to make huge profits by shifting their business from selling alcohol to selling illegal drugs. Mafia “families” became huge business enterprises, with profits rivaling those of legitimate corporations.

As the wealth and power of organized crime grew, Congress passed the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) in 1970. This law gives police the authority to seize property such as cars, boats, or homes used in the commission of crimes involving gambling, prostitution, loan sharking, or illegal drugs.

The opioid epidemic began to tear into U.S. society in the late 1990s. Some critics claim that pharmaceutical companies aggressively marketed powerful painkillers to physicians and minimized the dangers involved in taking these drugs, which ended up causing more deaths than guns. Should such corporate behavior be consider criminal? Why or why not?

Je an

-M ar

ie G

uy on

/1 23

R F.

210 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

problem. Many of us consider some acts of violence to be quite normal and perhaps even desirable. Polls show, for example, that a majority of people in the United States have supported many wars as a necessary form of violence, and a majority of U.S. adults also support the death penalty (itself an act of deadly violence) as justi- fied punishment for people convicted of certain serious crimes.

Is Violence a Social Problem? So when does violence become a social problem? A sim- ple answer is that violence becomes a social problem to the extent that people define it that way. In other words, whether violence is or is not a problem has less to do with the violent act itself and more to do with how the action is defined by some audience. But how do we decide which cases of violence are or are not a problem? In deciding how to define any act of violence, people commonly consider four basic factors:

1. What do the actors intend by their actions? A car crash is violent, but in most cases, people assume that the

Conference of State Legislatures, 2017, 2018). Wherever marijuana use or other victimless crimes are illegal, the enforcement of laws is inconsistent, usually taking the form of occasional crackdowns.

Violence 7.3 Discuss the causes and consequences of violence

in our society.

Violence is behavior that causes injury to people or damage to property. This chapter has already described many exam- ples of criminal violence, including all the crimes against persons—namely, homicide, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault.

But violence also plays a part in everyday life, often without anyone breaking the law. Many of our favorite sports (such as football) are quite violent, as are some forms of live entertainment (such as World Wrestling Entertainment) as well as many movies and video games.

Acting violently, then, may or may not be a crime, and people may or may not define violence as a social

SOCIAL PROBLEMS IN GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE

Organized Crime: All Over the World Corporations now operate as multinationals that do business all around the world. Organized crime, too, has gone global, raking in huge profits that the early gangsters who ran local rackets in Brooklyn, New York, or the South Side of Chicago could never have imagined.

Today, organized crime’s most profitable business is drug trafficking, which generates enough money to make the leaders of the biggest drug gangs richer than some entire countries. Just the sale of cocaine in the United States generates about $25 billion to drug cartels based in Colombia. However, drugs are not organized crime’s only business. Gangs also pirate CDs and DVDs, sell weapons, smuggle illegal immigrants, kill people for profit, and even carry out acts of terrorism.

The Russian mafiya has a vast, worldwide business in weapons sales, car theft, illegal drug sales, money laundering, identity theft, and human slavery. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russian crime organizations have expanded by forming partnerships with other criminal organizations around the world.

China’s Six Great Triads are centuries-old organizations. Today, they have more than 100,000 members and stand as the world’s largest criminal organizations. Operating in Chinese

communities around the world, the Triads deal in stolen cars, drugs, and weapons. They smuggle illegal immigrants, pirate electronics and software, and profit from gambling, loan sharking, and prostitution. Japan, too, has a vast criminal organization: The 60,000-member Yakuza engages in the same wide range of criminal activities.

All these organizations are active in the United States. In addition, over the past decade, drug-related violence in Mexico has claimed some 80,000 lives, which far exceeds the civilian death toll in the war-torn countries of Iraq and Afghanistan during that period (Grillo, 2016; Glenny, 2014; CNN, 2018).

What Do You Think? 1. Do criminal organizations simply meet a demand from the

public? Are they a real threat to the United States? Explain.

2. What actions, here and abroad, should the United States take to combat organized crime?

3. The drug-related death toll in Mexico threatens both that nation and the United States. Does our country have a legitimate interest in fighting the drug trade in Mexico? What could we do?

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 211

government in violation of the law. The war on terrorism, which gained importance after the 9/11 terror attacks, has led us to define any violence directed against the U.S. govern- ment or its citizens as a serious problem. In the United States, most people were outraged

event was an accident and that the driver did not intend it to happen. Despite the fact that thousands of lives are lost every year in traffic accidents, we tend to be for- giving toward violence that we think is unintended. On the other hand, in 2017 the driver who ran down and killed a woman protesting the white nation- alist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, was charged with first-degree murder.

2. Does the violence conform to or violate social norms and val- ues? Many sports are violent without being seen as social problems. As the sociologist Harry Edwards explains, football is about as violent as hand-to-hand combat, causing personal harm including spinal cord injuries and brain dam- age. Even so, football fans crave the bone-crushing hits between rival teams. Why? Edwards explains that football is a national ritual that upholds our cultural values of competitiveness, toughness, and masculinity.

3. Does the violence support or threaten the social order? Football may be violent, but it upholds our way of life. Football is also big business. Therefore, most people celebrate rather than condemn such vi- olent sports. On the other hand, hazing incidents involving campus sororities and fraternities may disrupt the campus order and, if discovered by au- thorities, typically result in disciplinary action.

4. Is the violence committed by or against the government? In general, people accept government- sanctioned violence such as war, capital punishment, and the action of police SWAT teams because they as- sume these actions defend and benefit the public. In general, there is widespread support for institutional violence, violence carried out by government represen- tatives under the law. In fact, most people believe that a certain amount of violence is actually necessary to keep society operating, whether it is used to oppose criminals or to defend our nation against foreign ene- mies. Of course, violence on the part of police or mil- itary personnel is not always lawful, as in the cases of police brutality or drone strikes killing innocent civil- ians. But most people accept a considerable amount of violence carried out by “the system.”

On the other hand, people are quick to condemn anti-institutional violence, violence directed against the

Many examples of violence exist within our society. The crash of a football tackle is certainly violent, and recent research

is raising serious questions about the long-term effects of football on players’ brain health. Yet few people consider football to be a social problem. Under what conditions is violence likely to be defined as a social problem?

Mike Powell/Allsport Concepts/Getty Images.

by the anti-institutional vio- lence of the 9/11 terrorists, yet most also supported the institutional violence of

the U.S. military response in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course, people will disagree about whether a violent military campaign is just or unjust. The antiwar move- ment worked with considerable success to shift national opinion against the U.S. military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Over time, members of a society carry on a debate about the right and wrong use of violence. In this process, a society comes to define new social problems. The Defining Moment feature explains how this country came to define one type of violence—what we now call “child abuse”—as a serious problem.

Serious Violence: Mass Murder and Serial Killings Certain types of violence are almost always defined as seri- ous social problems. Two examples of serious criminal vio- lence are mass murder and serial killings.

Mass Murder A definition of mass murder is the inten- tional, unlawful killing of three or more people at one time and place. This type of violent crime is tragically frequent in the United States. Between 2000 and early 2018, there were sixty-six instances of mass murder in the United States, resulting in 578 fatalities. The deadliest case of mass mur- der in the United States was the Las Vegas massacre in 2017, where a shooter killed fifty-seven people and injured 851. The death toll in the 2016 mass murder at an Orlando nightclub was forty-nine people with another fifty-eight injured.

A number of mass murders have taken place in schools. Another horrific case of mass murder was the 2012 killing of twenty children and six adults at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. In 2018, a shooter killed seventeen people in the Majory

212 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

planned to divorce him. He responded by using a rifle to kill all five of his own children. He then searched for his wife and, unable to find her, turned the gun on him- self. Mass murder can also take place in public, where it takes on the character of terrorism. In 2011, a Norwegian man carried out two separate attacks on innocent people in the city of Oslo. First, he detonated a car bomb that killed eight people and then, dressed as a policeman, he systematically gunned down sixty-nine people in a rural area nearby. In 2012, a disturbed young man wear- ing military clothing entered a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and fired guns into the crowd, killing twelve people and wounding fifty-eight. In 2015, a series of ter- rorist attacks in Paris killed 130 people and seriously injured 368 more. A month later, a married couple slaugh- tered fourteen people and seriously injured twenty-two

Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. Mass murder occurs not only at public events, schools, and churches but also in the workplace when disgruntled workers vent their rage against a number of people they feel have wronged them (Follman, Aronsen, & Pan, 2018).

Looking globally, as the Tracking the Trends figure at the beginning of this chapter shows, mass murder is far more common in the United States than in other high- income nations. Between 2000 and 2014, more than a dozen high-income countries reported at least one episode of mass murder, but as the data in the figure support, 323 of 484 or 67 percent of all global killings occurred in just one country—the United States (Schildkraut & Elsass, 2015; Follman, Aronsen, & Pan, 2018).

Mass murder can also occur in the home. For exam- ple, in 2009, Graham Troyer’s wife announced that she

Thanks to Dr. Kempe, doctors today routinely review medical data with an eye toward identifying cases of child abuse. This physician is using autopsy charts to describe the brain damage suffered by an abused six-year-old.

B et

tm an

n/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

CONSTRUCTING SOCIAL PROBLEMS

A Defining Moment: U.S. Society Discovers Child Abuse In 1958, C. Henry Kempe was working as a physician in Denver’s Colorado General Hospital. Every day, Kempe treated children for injuries such as lacerations and broken bones. Years of working in the emergency room and examining thousands of X-rays led Kempe to wonder if all children’s injuries were really the “accidents” that the parents said they were. Kempe suspected that some of these wounds resulted from violence in the home.

At this time, the concept of “child abuse” did not exist. People assumed that parents had both the right and the duty to care for their children, including punishing them when they felt it was necessary. What went on in the privacy of people’s homes was a family matter, not a public issue.

Kempe set out to change that belief. To protect children from violence in the home, Kempe set up the hospital’s first “child protection team,” a group of people trained to investigate and evaluate children’s injuries, deciding which might be the result of intentional violence. Three years later, he was able to document a surprisingly high level of deliberate violence against children, drawing the nation’s attention to a new social problem he defined as “battered child syndrome.”

The physical harm caused by family violence is obvious. What is less evident, Kempe explained, is the psychological harm—including poor self-image and high risk of depression— that prevents injured children from forming trusting relationships.

Kempe’s research prompted U.S. society to redefine violence against children from a private, family matter to a social problem. By 1966—eight years after Kempe began his crusade—every state had passed laws making child abuse a crime and requiring medical personnel to report suspected cases to authorities. As a result of these laws, about 3.2 million cases were reported in 2014, including about 702,000 confirmed to be serious and 1,580 that involved a child’s death. Of all cases of fatal abuse, about 80 percent involved children under the age of four.

Kempe not only made a difference in the lives of children, but he also opened the door for our society, in the years ahead, to define two other types of family violence as social problems: violence against women and violence against the elderly (Kempe et al., 1962; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2017).

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 213

ever higher. In 2018, for example, Darren Deon Vann awaited trial on first-degree murder charges in Indiana. Vann was arrested in 2014 for the murder of a nineteen- year-old woman and later confessed to six other killings (Jacobs, 2017).

A number of convicted serial killers have had even more victims. Back in the 1970s, Ted Bundy killed as many as thirty women. He was not the first serial killer to be identified, but his repeated crimes prompted our society to define serial killing as a serious type of vio- lence. Bundy was executed for his crimes in 1989. During the 1980s, Gary Ridgeway carried out a killing spree that involved at least forty-eight victims and may have involved twice that number. Ridgeway was sentenced to life in prison without parole. John Wayne Gacy, con- victed of killing thirty-three young men, was executed in 1994. Jeffrey Dahmer was convicted of fifteen murders, and in 1994 he died in a violent prison attack. In 2006, Robert Charles Browne, currently serving a life sentence in prison for one murder, confessed to forty-seven other killings, putting Browne among the deadliest serial kill- ers to date (Sarche, 2006).

Serial killers are probably the best known of all deadly offenders, and fictitious killers such as Hannibal “the Cannibal” Lecter have chilled millions of moviegoers. Although such cases grab the headlines, serial killers rep- resent only a tiny fraction of all murderers.

What do we know about serial killers? Almost all are men. Most are mentally ill, suffering from psychotic disorders that distort their sense of reality and strip them of the ability to feel compassion for others. Some serial killers claim to hear voices or to receive messages urging them to kill people in some specific category, such as women who are prostitutes or men who are gay. Many have an irresistible desire to control other peo- ple and gain great pleasure by putting others in fear. Still others cannot control their anger and strike out violently at anyone who might happen to get in their way. Finally, compared with those who commit single murders, most serial killers are somewhat older. These violent offenders are as likely to target men as women. No one can be sure how many serial killers are cur- rently active. Almost certainly the number is several dozen; one recent estimate put the number as high as 2,000 (Jenkins, 1994; Holmes & Holmes, 1998; Warf & Waddell, 2002; Gaudette, 2017).

The Mass Media and Violence The mass media—radio, television, movies, and the internet—have a huge influence on the way people— especially young people—view the world around them. Widespread violence in our society has no single cause, but

more in a terrorist attack at the Inland Regional Center in San Bernardino, California. In 2016, a young man killed forty-nine people in an Orlando nightclub. In 2017, another well-armed young man killed twenty-six people in a Texas church.

Mass murder has become normal in the United States. That is, the number of incidents continues to increase with sickening regularity. Schools routinely hold “lockdown drills” in the hope of saving lives. No one is surprised when the news reports another mass murder. In 2016, a total of seventy-one people died in the United States as a result of mass murder. In 2017, the number was 117.

As serious and horrifying as mass murder is, the problem of violence in the United States is far greater. In 2017, the death toll from all murders was 17,250. Contrasting these numbers, you can see that mass mur- der accounts for less than 1 percent of all deaths due to murder (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). But cases of mass murder are terrifying to the public because they involve so many deaths and they receive extensive attention in the mass media. Just as important, most mass murders occur in schools, businesses, churches, and homes, where people assume they are safe from violence.

What do mass murderers have in common? Almost all these offenders are men. Terrorist killings in public are carried out by people driven by a fanatical belief in the rightness of their cause. School shootings typically are carried out by mentally disturbed young men—students or ex- students—who have experienced rejection by their peers. Mass murder in the workplace usually involves dis- turbed male employees or ex-employees, most of whom carry intense anger caused by perceived injustice and made more intense by abuse of alcohol or other drugs. Mass murder in the home typically involves men who have been rejected by spouses or other family members and who are emotionally distraught. Mass murderers are people with access to guns, most obtained legally, and they typically own many weapons. On average, they car- ried three guns when they carried out their crime. The Las Vegas shooter who killed fifty-seven people in 2017 had twenty-three weapons with him at the time of the attack, including devices to allow rifles to shoot in almost auto- matic mode (Hill, 2009; Berkowitz et al., 2016; Jarvis & Johnson, 2017).

Serial Murder Another type of killing that gets a great deal of public attention is serial murder, the kill- ing of several people by one offender over a period of time. Typically, a serial killer commits one murder and then waits for a week or a month before killing again. Over time, the death toll—along with public fear—builds

214 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

link between the extent of childhood television watching and aggressive personality disorders as well as criminal convictions even when controlling for sex, intelligence, and social class (Robertson, McAnally, & Hancox, 2013). Other studies conclude that the more media violence children watch, the more they engage in rough play and the more likely they are to engage in violence as adults. In addition, some offenders claim that, when committing their crimes, they were acting out behavior they saw in movies.

Watching violence in the mass media, then, may actu- ally encourage people to be more violent. But perhaps an even more serious concern is that the media may end up desensitizing us all to violence. Living in a media-violence culture, in other words, violence becomes normalized. That is, we become so used to violence that the idea of peo- ple deliberately hurting each other no longer bothers us (Ritter, 2003; Federal Communications Commission, 2007; Pozios, Kambam, & Bender, 2013; American Psychological Association, 2018).

Poverty and Violence Violence is also linked to poverty in ways that are both powerful and complex. The story begins with ways in which poverty shapes the social environment.

Low-income people typically contend with poor nutri- tion, limited schooling, substandard housing, and lack of job opportunities. As a result, they experience high levels of everyday stress.

Most low-income people endure such conditions with- out turning to crime or violence. But poverty does raise the risk of both. For this reason, some analysts claim poverty itself should be defined as a form of violence that harms tens of millions of people in the United States. Low-income people are highly represented among both offenders and victims of violent crime (Parler & Pruitt, 2000; Hannon & Knapp, 2003; Harrell et al., 2014).

Youth Gangs and Violence Especially in the poor neighborhoods of large U.S. cities, violence is linked to youth gangs, groups of young people who identify with one another and with a particular territory. Not all gangs are violent, of course. In fact, not all groups of young people are even called “gangs.” We have a ten- dency to call middle-class groups “clubs” while calling groups of poor young people “gangs,” regardless of how their members act.

A recent government study found 3,100 jurisdictions with “gang problems” and identified more than 33,000 street, motorcycle, and prison gangs with 1.4 million members (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). Gangs range from nonviolent social groups to groups that sometimes

many members of our society think that the mass media play some part.

The basis of this concern is the enormous amount of violence in today’s mass media. Currently, the most pop- ular video games among young people include “Player Unknown Battleground” and “Fortnite,” in which the player tries to kill 100 others one at a time and “win- ning” means that everyone else dies. The typical young person in the United States watches eight or nine hours of media each day, and much of this viewing contains plenty of violence. Over the course of a year, analysts estimate, a typical young person observes roughly 12,000 violent acts (Groves, 1997; Common Sense Media, 2015; Hollister, 2017).

Television shows—even cartoons—contain lots of violence. Movies, on average, are even more violent. The high level of violence in the movies prompted the American Medical Association (1997) to declare that the mass media are hazardous to our health, reporting that three-fourths of U.S. adults say they have either turned off a television program or walked out of a movie because of high and disturbing levels of violence. Another survey found that two-thirds of parents are “very concerned” about the amount of violence their children see in the mass media. Making matters worse, this study found, characters that engage in violence typ- ically are not punished, nor do they display any remorse (Rideout, 2007).

Does viewing violence cause people to commit violent acts? Certainly, not in every case. But the general answer may be yes. A recent New Zealand study of 1,037 individ- uals over the course of twenty-six years found a significant

How much violence is presented on television? Researchers have concluded that most television shows contain at least some violence. Just as important, almost no shows contain antiviolence themes. At the very least, the high dose of violence that we receive from shows like The Walking Dead seems likely to reduce our reaction to violence, so we become accepting of violence as an element of everyday life.

C ol

le ct

io n

C hr

is to

ph el

/A la

m y

S to

ck P

ho to

.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 215

year. That death toll is almost four times higher than the number of murders (17,250 in 2016) known to police. A major part of this loss of life is the current opioid epi- demic that has twisted the lives of countless people who are addicted, as well as shattered the lives of their fam- ily members and friends. Chapter 8 (“Alcohol and Other Drugs”) explores this problem in detail.

Guns and Violence On February 14—Valentine’s Day—in 2018, an angry and disturbed nineteen-year-old stepped out of an Uber car and entered Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, armed with a semiautomatic assault rifle and a lot of ammunition. He activated a fire alarm, know- ing that this would bring people out of their classrooms into the hallways. Then he opened fire. Seventeen students and school staff members were gunned down and died; fif- teen more were hit and later rushed to local hospitals.

In six minutes, the gunshots ended as the young man put down his gun and left the building. Soon after he was arrested by local police. The gun violence was over, but the debate was just beginning. This was not the first school shooting in the United States; it was not even the first school shooting in 2018. In fact, the Parkland tragedy was the eigh- teenth time a gun had been fired on school grounds that year (a number that includes fights and suicides), which means about three episodes of school gun violence per week.

There was something new this time. Parkland students launched a campaign to end school violence. Appearing on television, speaking on radio shows, and making use of

clash over turf to all-out criminal organizations that engage in drug dealing, robbery, extortion, and even murder.

Who is likely to join a violent gang? The typical member comes from a poor, single-parent family living in a neighborhood with high rates of crime and drug abuse and few available jobs. Many gang members have experienced violence in their own homes. Many young people look to gangs for opportunities, protection, and a positive self- image that they cannot find elsewhere (Pyrooz & Sweeten, 2015).

Some low-income communities develop a street culture that teaches young people that the only way others will leave you alone is to be tough and quick to fight. In such a setting, young people—especially males— embrace violence as a strategy to avoid becoming a victim (Anderson, 1994, 2002).

The level of gang violence fell after about 1990, along with the overall crime rate. After 2002, however, gang- related violence in large cities was once again on the rise, and gang-related killing has become an epidemic in some large U.S. cities. In Chicago, a city with a long history of gun violence, police records show 2,785 shootings in 2017, resulting in 650 deaths. Some people saw these numbers as good news because the death toll was even higher the previous year. Most of these deaths were gang related (Armentrout, 2017; Madhani, 2018).

Drugs and Violence Violence is also fueled by the use of alcohol and other drugs. One government study found that 24 percent of the victims of violent crime thought their attackers were under the influence of alcohol or some other drug. A more recent study states that between 60 and 80 percent of people in prison for violent offenses claim to have been under the influence of a drug when they committed their crimes (U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2015; National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, 2018).

Drugs encourage violence by distorting judgment and reducing inhibitions. When a person who is already inclined to react to frustration and stress with violent behavior uses drugs, the odds of “losing it” go way up (Gelles, 1997). In addition, some drugs are addictive and cause cravings so strong that people may turn violent in their search for the next high. In the process, drug abusers threaten those around them, including children who may experience neglect or outright violence. In this way, drugs may create a cycle of violence that spills from one genera- tion to the next.

Drug use itself can be a type of violence. Drug over- doses kill about 64,000 people in the United States every

A change in the national debate over gun control appeared to be taking place in the wake of the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, in 2018. The politics played out with liberals pointing to the easy availability of guns as the main cause of these shootings; conservatives pointed to the disturbed individuals who explode in violence due to mental illness. After the Parkland tragedy, surveys showed a majority of U.S. adults (71 percent)—and even a majority of gun owners (56 percent)— supporting stronger regulation of gun purchases (Howland, 2018).

C ris

to ba

l H er

re ra

/E PA

-E FE

/S hu

tt er

st oc

k.

216 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

2016, handguns were involved in nearly half of all murders in the United States.

Because many household guns find their way into the hands of criminals or even curious chil- dren, many people—especially liberals—define gun ownership itself as a serious social problem. They point out that many guns used in violent crime were readily purchased at a gun store. As they see it, the United States requires only that people pass a simple background check that looks for criminal convictions, a history of domestic vio- lence, and checks immigration status. In recent years, a number of mass shootings have been carried out by people who passed this test, often because relevant information was not entered into the database.

The situation is different in most other coun- tries. In Canada, Australia, or Japan, for exam- ple, a person wishing to purchase a firearm must join a shooting club, complete a safety course, and pass a more rigorous background check that includes assessing mental health (Carlson & Chinoy, 2018).

Therefore, liberals continue, a solution to the problem of guns and violence is enacting laws that make guns harder to get or, for some,

banning guns entirely. By restricting the availability of handguns, violence in the United States might not dis- appear, but it would become a whole lot less deadly. Supporters of gun control also favor laws requiring gun owners to apply trigger locks that make guns harder to use. In addition, they support a ban on military-style assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition clips. In many of the recent cases of mass murder, individuals using assault weapons had the firepower to kill many people in minutes before police could arrive.

Supporters of gun control point to Canada, where the government sharply restricts gun ownership (Canada has just under 1 million handguns compared with more than 325 million in the United States). There is no easy way to assess cause and effect here, but Canada’s rate of firearms deaths (taking account of the smaller population) is one- sixth that of the United States (Statistics Canada, 2015). In this country, not only are guns more readily available but also, as shown in National Map 7–1, most states allow citizens to obtain a permit to carry a concealed handgun in public.

Reducing gun violence would provide enormous ben- efits to minority communities. Today, gun violence is the leading cause of death for African American males between the ages of fifteen and thirty-four (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2015).

Even so, not everyone thinks guns are part of the problem. Opponents of gun control—including many

Personal weapons (fists, hands, feet)

4.4%

Strangulation 0.7%

Fire 0.7%

Handguns 47.1%

Other firearms 25.8%

Knives 10.6%

Blunt objects 3.1%

All other 7.6%

Figure 7–3 Murder: Type of Weapon Used

Firearms are used in more than two-thirds of all murders. Handguns are involved in almost as many killings as all other weapons combined.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation (2017).

social media, students challenged politicians, demanding that schools no longer become killing zones. The Twitter campaign #NeverAgain now has millions of followers (Newcomb, 2018).

Many people blame our society’s high level of violent crime on the easy availability of firearms. One fact about guns that almost everyone agrees on is that there are many of them—at least 325 million. This number represents about half the guns owned by civilians in the entire world. It is also enough weapons to arm every man, woman, and child in the country. The number of guns is also increasing, per- haps because some fear that buying weapons will be more difficult in the future. In 2016, more than 11 million guns were manufactured in the United States for nonmilitary use, a historic high and four times the number made in 2001 (U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Firearms, and Explosives, 2018).

From another angle, one in three U.S. households has at least one gun. Over the last fifty years, the share of armed households has been trending downward from about half, largely due to a decline in hunting. Gun owner- ship remains high in rural areas (still about half of house- holds), but it is much lower in suburbs (about one-fourth) and lowest in cities (one-fifth). From another angle, just 6  percent of households in urban Delaware have a fire- arm in contrast to ten times that share in a rural state like Wyoming (Horsley, 2016; Parker et al., 2017).

Among households with guns, 72 percent own at least one handgun (Parker et al., 2017). Figure 7–3 shows that, in

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 217

confuse police as to who the criminals actually are, raise the odds of accidental shootings, and end up increas- ing the level of deadly violence. One critic pointed out that most of our nation’s police officers are not highly skilled with guns; we should not expect teachers in a panic-filled situation to be able to kill a shooter without harming others (Nagourney & Turkewitz, 2015; Cohen, 2018).

Gun ownership is an issue that divides the U.S. popu- lation and also breaks along party lines. In general, people who do not own guns are liberal in outlook. If only vot- ers who do not own a gun had cast a ballot in the 2016 presidential election, Hillary Clinton would have won every state except perhaps West Virginia. By contrast, gun owners are mostly conservative in outlook; had only gun owners voted in the presidential election, Donald Trump would have won every state except for Vermont (Matthews, 2018).

How the gun-control debate will play out is far from clear. There is considerable public support for making background checks more effective, raising the age for gun purchases, and banning the most deadly weapons. Another small change is that a number of large sporting

conservatives and most people on the far right—point to the Second Amendment to the Constitution, which recog- nizes the right to “keep and bear arms” as one of this coun- try’s basic freedoms. They claim that gun-control laws, such as the 1993 Brady Bill requiring a background check for anyone wishing to buy a gun, do little to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, who typically obtain guns illegally. This thinking is expressed in the familiar bumper sticker that reads, “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.”

Some opponents of gun control go further and argue that gun ownership is actually part of the solution to the problem of violence. Why? In the wake of the Parkland shooting, President Trump claimed that schools are soft tar- gets because, as gun-free zones, no one can defend against a shooter. Why not ensure that a few school personnel are trained in firearm use and allow these people to be armed? Would a shooter be as quick to enter a school knowing that an armed response is waiting?

Eight states have already adopted this policy. In mid-2016, for example, Texas began allowing people to carry concealed firearms in schools and on campus. Critics respond that arming more people would only

HAWAII

Concealed Weapon Laws

Shall issue

May issue

Allowed without any permit

ARIZONA

NEVADA

CALIFORNIA

OREGON

WASHINGTON

IDAHO

MONTANA NORTH

DAKOTA MINNESOTA

SOUTH DAKOTA

NEBRASKA

WYOMING

COLORADO

NEW MEXICO

TEXAS

LOUISIANA

ARKANSASOKLAHOMA

KANSAS MISSOURI

IOWA

WISCONSIN

MICHIGAN

ILLINOIS INDIANA

OHIO

KENTUCKY

TENNESSEE

MISSISSIPPI

ALABAMA GEORGIA

SOUTH CAROLINA

NORTH CAROLINA

VIRGINIA

D.C. WEST

VIRGINIA

DELAWARE

NEW JERSEY

MARYLAND

PENNSYLVANIA

NEW YORK

CONNECTICUT RHODE ISLAND

MAINEVERMONT

NEW HAMPSHIRE MASSACHUSETTS

FLORIDA

UTAH

ALASKA

Seeing Ourselves National Map 7–1 Who’s Packin’? Concealed Weapon Laws across the United

States

In twelve states (Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Kansas, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming), any person can carry a concealed weapon without a permit. Eight other states (identified as “may issue” states) issue concealed weapon permits in cases of demonstrated special need. But in most states (“shall issue” states)—thirty in all—permits are available to most people without special need. What regional pattern do you see? Can you explain this pattern?

SOURCE: Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (2017).

218 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

The Criminal Justice System 7.4 Analyze the operation of the U.S. criminal justice

system.

The criminal justice system is society’s use of due process, involving police, courts, and punishment, to enforce the law. The following sections survey elements of the U.S. criminal justice system.

Due Process The U.S. Constitution states that no person can be “deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.” In simple terms, due process means that the crimi- nal justice system must operate according to the law.

The law recognizes that people charged with crimes have rights. These include the right to confront their accusers and to defend themselves; they have a right to legal counsel and the right to a speedy, impartial, and public trial with a jury, if desired. Further, citizens can refuse to testify against themselves, and the criminal justice system cannot try a person twice for the same crime. In addition, the Constitution shields all people from excessive bail and protects them against cruel and unusual punishment if they are found guilty (Inciardi, 2000).

Following due process certainly makes our criminal justice system slower and more expensive in its operation. At the same time, following the law and providing individ- uals with extensive protections from arbitrary government power is a foundation of our cultural and political systems.

Police The first official response to crime involves police. The lat- est count tallied 543,105 police officers in the United States (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). Still, even this many officers can do only so much to regulate a society of nearly 325 million people. Therefore, police must make decisions as to which situations are serious enough to require their attention.

Police Discretion Police use discretion deciding whether to intervene in any situation. In a study of police discretion in five cities, Douglas Smith and Christy Visher (Smith & Visher, 1981; Smith, 1987) identified six factors that guided police in deciding whether to make an arrest:

1. How serious is the crime? The more serious a situa- tion seems and the more it involves violence or the risk of violence, the greater the odds are that police will make an arrest.

2. What does the victim want? If a victim demands that an arrest be made, police are more likely to do so.

goods stores have recently announced that they would no longer sell guns to anyone under the age of twenty-one. At the same time, mass shootings in recent years have prompted public outrage but have resulted in little change.

The Obama administration tried for eight years to advance gun control, but little changed. In 2018, in the wake of the Parkland school shooting, the gun-control debate continues more fiercely than ever. There is some good news: Since 1993—the year that the rate peaked— the level of gun violence has fallen by half. But our nation endures more than 12,000 killings a year involv- ing guns. Keep in mind that violence in the United States involves more than guns. More than one-fourth of the murders in the United States in 2016 did not involve guns at all. In fact, the number of people in the United States who were killed by someone wielding a knife is three times the number of Canadians killed by weapons of all kinds (Statistics Canada, 2015; U.S. Department of Justice, 2017).

In 2014, a New York man named Eric Garner was selling untaxed cigarettes on the street in violation of the law. Police confronted Garner, subdued him, and Garner died apparently after one of the officers applied a chokehold. Police must be allowed to use discretion in dealing with the public, and officers also must be able to apply force when necessary. But there is widespread controversy over the use of deadly force in situations that do not appear to threaten officers, especially in cases involving people of color.

N ew

Y or

k D

ai ly

N ew

s/ G

et ty

Im ag

es .

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 219

plea bargaining, a negotiation in which the state reduces a defendant’s charge in exchange for a guilty plea. Plea bar- gaining saves the time and expense of a trial, allowing courts to focus on the most serious cases. But a system that is efficient is not always just. This is especially true when dealing with low-income defendants. Under the law, the government must provide a public defender at no cost to any defendant who is unable to pay for a lawyer. Commonly, public defenders are young lawyers with limited experience; they are typically overworked and underpaid. As a result, a public defender is typi- cally eager to settle a case quickly. Without an aggressive defense, low-income defendants may feel that they have no choice but to “cop a plea.” Critics point to plea bar- gaining as necessary to support this country’s increas- ing prison population (Del Valle, 2017; Laughland, 2018; Yoffe, 2017).

In some states, public defenders are not the excep- tion but the rule. One recent study in Louisiana found that 80 percent of criminal defendants were represented by public defenders. Budget cuts in that state have reduced the number of public attorneys to the point that they not only have caseloads that may reach into the hundreds but they also must place defendants on waiting lists that can exceed 1,000 people (Robertson, 2016). By relying so heavily on plea bargaining, our criminal justice system may violate the ideal of due pro- cess by taking away a defendant’s constitutional right to a trial in which the person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Punishment In response to law breaking, the criminal justice system makes use of various forms of punishment, ranging from fines to jail time to death. In 2016, more than 2.2 million people were incarcerated in the United States, almost five times the number behind bars back in 1980 (U.S. Department of Justice, 2017). As shown in Figure 7–4, this country now imprisons a larger share of its population than any other nation.

One reason for the increasing prison population—a pattern critics regard as a policy of “mass incarceration”—is that many states have enacted tough sentencing laws. Twenty-eight states now have “three strikes and you’re out” laws that require a life sentence for a third felony con- viction. Another policy that raises the prison population is a mandatory prison sentence for specific serious crimes. The idea behind all these policies is to get people who commit serious crimes—especially repeat offenders—off the streets.

For decades, the debate over corrections has been dominated by voices favoring being tough on crime and criticizing others for being soft on crime. A recent

3. Is the suspect cooperative? Police are more likely to arrest an uncooperative suspect.

4. Does the suspect have a record? Police are more likely to arrest someone they know has been arrested before.

5. Are bystanders watching? Police are more likely to make an arrest when people are watching. This gives police more control of the situation by moving it off the street.

6. What is the suspect’s race? Smith and Visher argue that, all other factors being equal, police are more likely to arrest African American and Hispanic sus- pects than whites.

Changes in Police Policy Two recent changes in police work have contributed to the downturn in crime rates in U.S. cities. First, the practice of community policing makes police more visible to the public by moving some police officers from cars to bicycle or foot patrol. The idea is for officers to get to know local neighborhoods and for neighbors to get to know them; police and community cooperation is a proven strategy to reduce crime.

A second innovation in police work is a zero-tolerance policy under which police respond to any offense, no matter how minor. Under the Bloomberg administration, police in New York City ticketed or arrested people for minor offenses including jaywalking and jumping turnstiles to enter the city’s subway system. Supporters claim that this policy deters crime because people who know any minor infraction may cause police to stop and search them are less likely to risk arrest for carrying an illegal weapon. Critics counter that a zero-tolerance policy encourages police to harass law-abiding citizens (and especially minorities) for minor infractions instead of concentrating on solving major crimes.

Courts Arrest does not make someone a criminal. About half of suspects who are arrested are later released for various rea- sons, including a lack of evidence against them. The other half are formally charged and move through the criminal justice system toward trial in a court of law. In theory, the U.S. court system is an adversarial process, meaning that the prosecutor presents the state’s case against the defendant and the defendant’s attorney presents a defense against the charges. The judge or jury weighs the evidence and reaches a verdict based on the strength of the cases presented by the two sides.

Viewers of television shows such as Law & Order may imagine that this adversarial process is carried out very carefully. In reality, it is rarely carried out at all. About 95 percent of all criminal cases are settled through

220 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Retribution is moral vengeance by which society inflicts on the offender suffering comparable to that caused by the offense. Retribution is based on the idea that the moral order of society is upset when someone commits a crime. But the moral balance can be restored by declaring the offender guilty and exacting a fitting punishment. The ancient say- ing “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” expresses this vision of justice and balance.

Deterrence A second reason to punish is deterrence, using punishment to discourage further crime. Deterrence is a more modern idea, emerging in the eighteenth century during the Enlightenment along with the view of humans as rational decision makers. If society inflicts pain of pun- ishment that outweighs the pleasure or benefit of the offense, people should realize that “crime does not pay” and behave themselves.

Punishment provides specific deterrence to the indi- vidual offender, who will think twice before offending again. At the same time, punishment provides general deterrence by teaching everyone what happens to people who break the law. However, the success of deterrence rests on the assumption that people actually do make rational decisions. Most people consider consequences of their actions at least most of the time. But it is also true that people inflamed by emotion may not be affected by deterrence, resulting in so-called “crimes of passion.” And some people, of course, may not respond to punishment at all. Finally, keep in mind that deterrence works only to the extent that people believe that offenders will be caught, which, especially with respect to property crimes, is not the case in the United States today.

Rehabilitation A third justification for punishment is rehabilitation, reforming an offender to prevent future offenses. The idea of rehabilitation emerged during the nineteenth century along with the rise of the social sciences. If the reason people turn to crime in the first place is a bad environment, then it should be possible for a better environment to transform them into law-abiding citizens. A belief in rehabilitation explains why prisons built about this time were typically called houses of correction or reformatories.

Rehabilitation differs from retribution and deterrence because it is built on positive intention: Rehabilitation tries to help people improve rather than to make them suffer. In other words, punishment is transformed into treatment. Rehabilitation also differs in another way: Retribution and deterrence demand that the punishment fit the crime, but rehabilitation means tailoring treatment to the personal needs of a specific offender.

Societal Protection The fourth reason to punish is soci- etal protection, protecting the public by using incarceration or

N u

m b

er o

f Pe

o p

le in

P ri

so n

p er

1 00

,0 00

P o

p u

la ti

o n

, 2 01

6

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Can ad

a

Austr ali

a

M ex

ico

Russ ia

Unite d S

ta te

s

212

693

152

453

114

Global Snapshot Figure 7–4 Rates of Incarceration for Selected

Countries

The 2016 rate of incarceration for the United States was 693 people for every 100,000 in the population. Among all the nations of the world, this country has the highest share of its people in prison.

SOURCE: Wagner & Walsh (2016).

trend in the corrections field is moving past the old tough versus soft debate to being smart about crime. Supporters of smart crime policy include both con- servatives and liberals. Conservatives make the point that recent increases in prison populations threaten to bankrupt cities and states. Liberals add that three strike laws and mandatory sentences laws are sending too many people who are not violent offenders to jail. Being smart about crime involves assessing the public threat that an offender represents and using prisons only for those who truly put the public at risk. In addition, pris- ons are not the only way to handle people convicted of crimes. For some nonviolent offenders, community supervision may be an effective policy. For those with addiction and other personal issues, treatment strate- gies may make more sense than a lockup (Savage, 2011; Berman & Protass, 2013; National Conference of State Legislatures, 2016).

But why do societies make use of prison and other forms of punishment at all? In principle, there are four jus- tifications for punishing convicted offenders: retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation, and societal protection.

Retribution In human history, the oldest justification for punishment is to gain revenge against a criminal offender.

Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice 221

Whatever good intentions underlie our system of punishment, there is increasing criticism of the policy of mass incarceration, by which an unprecedented 2.2 mil- lion people are behind bars. Conservatives typically take issue with the high costs of this practice. Liberals typi- cally point to the harmful effects of incarceration, includ- ing breaking up families and subjecting people to the violence of prison life. In addition, the harmful effects of mass incarceration are targeted largely on people of color and minority communities. Perhaps, as some suggest, the money used to carry on the present policy of mass incar- ceration might better be used to invest in the low-income communities where street crime is most common (Justice Reinvestment, 2014).

Restorative Justice A recent idea in the field of cor- rections is the concept of restorative justice, a response to crime seeking to restore the well-being of the victim, offender, and larger communities that has been lost due to crime. The idea here is that, whatever conventional punishment may accomplish with regard to offenders, it does little to assist victims or to heal the communities that are inflamed by crime. Therefore, courts that embrace restorative justice bring together offenders and victims to engage in dia- logue about what happened, why it happened, and how the event affected each of them. Offenders are encouraged to understand their crime and to take responsibility for their actions. Victims have the opportunity to explain their loss, express their feelings, and assess their needs. No one expects victims to immediately forgive offend- ers. But the goal of restorative justice is a resolution that begins a long-term process of healing involving all parties (Baliga, 2013).

execution to prevent an offender from com- mitting further offenses. In recent decades, the United States has built prisons at the rate of a new 1,000-bed facility every week. Placing some 2.2 million people in jail, the argument goes, is bound to bring down the crime rate.

Does Punishment Work? We have now reviewed four justifications for punish- ment. But the question still remains whether punishment is an effective solu- tion to the crime problem. Does punish- ment work? Or does punishment itself create problems? The answers are far from clear.

Retribution is based on the idea that condemning crime and harming offend- ers strengthen public morality. Many people react to punishment with the comforting thought that justice is being done. Yet others argue that punishment—from prisons to the death penalty—is not effective and only further brutal- izes a society that already has too much violence.

Deterrence, too, is controversial. Although com- mon sense suggests that punishment discourages crime, this country has a high rate of criminal recidivism, later offenses by people previously convicted of crimes. A study of people who were released from prison in 2005 in thirty states across the country concluded that 68 percent of these people were rearrested for a new crime within three years and 77 percent were rearrested within five years (Cooper, Durose, & Snyder, 2014). A high rate of repeat offenders casts doubt on the claim that prison deters fur- ther crime.

What about rehabilitation? Again, prison may help some offenders “straighten out.” But the high recidivism rate suggests that successful rehabilitation is the excep- tion rather than the rule. Some critics go even further and claim that prison actually makes the crime problem worse. How? For one thing, putting offenders in jail with other offenders encourages them all to share their knowledge and skills with one another; prison is hardly a place that is likely to reform anyone. In addition, the stigma of being an “ex-con” almost certainly makes getting a good job after release that much harder (Petersilia, 1997; DeFina & Arvanites, 2002).

Finally, punishment probably does result in societal protection. Few people doubt that in the short term, the rapidly increasing number of people in U.S. prisons has played a part in bringing down this country’s crime rate. But whether this pattern holds for the long term—as our large prison population is gradually released back into society—is less certain (Johnson, 2000).

In recent years, the United States has imprisoned record numbers of people with the goal of controlling the crime problem. What arguments can you point to in support of this policy? On balance, do you think this policy works or not? Why?

A . R

am ey

/P ho

to E

di t,

In c.

222 Chapter 7 Crime, Violence, and Criminal Justice

Area of inset

Greenland (Den.)

Western Sahara (Mor.)

Hong Kong

Macao

New Caledonia

(Fr.)

Taiwan

SINGAPORE

West Bank

PUERTO RICO (U.S.)

French Guiana (Fr.)

TUVALU

SAMOA

FIJI

TONGA

NEW ZEALAND

AUSTRALIA

SOLOMON ISLANDS