Wheaton College Norton, Massachusetts
Wheaton College
Sociology

Departmental News Archive

  • Rivera-small Karl Rivera ’16

    …equipped marginalized people in India with digital cameras so they could express how they see the world…

  • Mia Cambi '16 Wouldn't You Like a Barbie Doll Instead?

    The fact that Little Sally is raising issues of gender equality and sexism in popular media suggests that Santa better watch out. The times might be changing. By Mia Cambi ’16

    "Wouldn't You Like a Barbie Doll Instead?" by Mia Cambi'16

    "What Do You Want for Christmas" by Chris Allison. Source: Toonhole.com, December 2, 2015

    "What Do You Want for Christmas" by Chris Allison. Source: Toonhole.com, December 2, 2015

    What Would You Like For Christmas? is a 2015 gag cartoon by Chris Allison posted on a comic site, Toonhole. The cartoon refers to Americans growing concern about gender inequality. The conversation in this particular strip is not one that would have been seen in comic strips a generation or so ago. In past decades women were mostly depicted in stereotypical female roles – cooking, cleaning, and taking care of children – but to question – let alone speak of -- sexism would not have figured in any of the punch lines.

    In this comic, Santa represents cultural obduracy. He is not villainized by the cartoonist; he is just doing what he has done for centuries, being the symbol of Christmas and answering the dreams of people who have been good. But as a guardian of cultural continuity the dreams he answers are limited by what the system can routinely provide. Whether he is befuddled by, or annoyed at, Little Sally’s request his answer is clear. Little Sally should get over wishing for a future free of sexism and crippling student loan debt because that definitely will not happen by December 25, 2015.

    American society has made great strides in accepting women in the public sphere and reducing their inequality. However, this comic strip makes it clear that the struggle for equality is far from complete. Santa’s response reflects an older view that society in general, and especially many men, discount the needs of women because, after all, so long as women are protected, safe, and secure within traditional arrangements, what more could they want. Santa also may be puzzled about how to respond to a request that can’t be satisfied by commodities. This strip is acknowledging a social disconnect as Little Sally asks for something that many people feel is not realistic from someone like Santa, who couldn’t possibly deliver it, even if he wanted.

    While sexism is still expressed in very obvious forms, it tends to thrive in a kind of cultural underground, the world of everyday life, often outside of public scrutiny. Countless women are laid off or demoted while pregnant or when they return from maternity leave. They also must endure myriad ways of being undercut by stereotypes in the workplace. Some women’s rise up the corporate ladder is cut short when they begin to start a family, something men experience far less often. One way of making gender inequality public is advertising the widely known statistic that women earn 77 cents to every one-dollar a man makes. But this claim is often quickly undercut by sniffing that it does not account for wage differences in the occupations most populated by men and women. While this is true, closer examination of these differences most often shows that income inequality still exists between men and women within the same occupation. According to an article published by CNN Money last April, women hold more than 70% of elementary school teaching jobs but men still earn more in the same position. The median weekly income for a male teacher is $1,096, whereas women earn $956, about 87 cents to the man’s dollar.

    Student loans can be considered America’s next big crisis as the debt reaches $1.2 trillion. Society today puts more of an emphasis on attending college, which under current arrangements only means more debt. At the moment, students are forced to use loans to finance their education if they cannot pay tuition with cash, grants, and scholarships. Until there is an alternative source of financing college tuition, those students will need loans and this does not look like it is changing anytime soon, and it is unlikely that universities will be reducing their tuition costs in the near future. At the rate college tuition continues to increase, in 15 years Little Sally will be asking Santa for $130,000 each year for Christmas.

    Santa probably would have been happier if Little Sally had asked for a Barbie doll instead. In Barbie’s world, things are a lot easier. Everything comes naturally to her and all she needs are the outfits that enable her to be whatever she wants, a college student, veterinarian, lifeguard, or a lawyer. But who’s being realistic here? Nevertheless, the fact that figures like Little Sally are raising issues of gender equality and sexism in popular media suggests that Santa better watch out. What is not realistic today, may be on tomorrow’s agenda, and sooner than many people think!

  • Meyer-cropped Fighting crime in New Orleans

    Henry Meyer ’94 believes in a more cerebral approach to policing, influenced by his time at Wheaton and by his liberal arts education.

  • Megan Barnes '18 Best Buds or What?

    Today we might guess that photographs of two men holding hands and sitting on each others’ laps would indicate they were gay. But not so in the 19th century. Why did the expression of male affection change? By Megan Barnes ’18

    "Best Buds or What?" By Megan Barnes'18

    Two Young Men, daguerreotype, C. 1850. Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, www.metmuseum.org

    Two Young Men, daguerreotype, C. 1850. Source: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, www.metmuseum.org

    An unidentified photographer made this daguerreotype portraying two young men in the mid nineteenth century, only eleven years after the invention of photography. On first examination, a modern viewer would likely think that these two men were lovers. However, when the photo was made being “homosexual” was not a recognized identity (however maligned) and a limited number of what we might today view as “homosexual acts” were defined as aberrant. Very few people then would dream of assuming that two physically close men were romantically or sexually involved with each other, just as we do not typically presume that an affectionate dog owner would be sexually or romantically involved with their pet.

    Had it been an established belief that the same desires and behaviors that occur between a man and woman could also happen between men, then it is likely that the same constraints that regulated how men and women were portrayed together in photographs during this period would militate against any depiction of intimacy between men. Photographers did not generally record displays of romantic affection between men and women. It just wasn’t seemly. Thus, when we look at early photographs of men with clasped hands and intertwined legs, we are not seeing an expression of radical sexuality or romance. Rather, we are witnessing a time when the display of unabashed affection between men was an acceptable practice. Sometime between the mid-nineteenth century and today, however, this changed so that what was once seen as normal became abnormal and unimaginable unless it was intended as a spoof. Historians now believe that what transpired was that people in the late nineteenth century to early twentieth century came to identify homosexuality as not just sinful but also a threat to heterosexuality and came to stigmatize most displays of affection between males as signs of being a homosexual.

    Not burdened by the stigma of homosexuality, men of the 19th century enjoyed an expanded emotional and physical closeness with one another. These kinds of bonds were expected and happened largely out of necessity due to contemporary social beliefs and practices. During this period men and women’s social spheres didn't overlap very much because it was believed that the two sexes were intellectually and emotionally incompatible (save for the realm of sexual and marital relations) and that unregulated and frequent contact between men and women might encourage indecent sexual encounters. The result of these arrangements was the creation of “boys only club” mentality that encompassed the life of a young man in the 1850s, fostering intense and affectionate bonds between men that we very rarely see today and find hard to imagine.

    When people started speaking of homosexuality and scientists determined homosexuality to be an “inversion” of heterosexuality -- a deviation from the norm and a mental illness -- men began developing a kind of homophobia. Fearing they would be labeled as homosexuals, men began distancing themselves from each other both emotionally and physically. As you might expect, the commonly assumed pose featured in this daguerreotype, which photographers would encourage men to perform in their studios -- as well as any other gestures of male affection -- became entirely unacceptable,

    Changes in the early twentieth century created a “perfect storm” of pressures that dramatically changed how masculinity was expressed. Men and women found that social expectations afforded them more opportunities for unregulated contact, whether in the office, where women were beginning to work in close propinquity to males, or in the distractions of the modern metropolis. As is clearly shown in the movies and advertisements of the time, men and women were forced to come to terms with each other’s presence, and this encouraged more social interaction and stimulated sexual attraction. Courting and mating was now increasingly unregulated by older generations and became the responsibility of those who were doing the partnering. Roles had to be improvised and the prospects of success or failure created lots of anxiety, which made the participants susceptible to strictures that promised success in the sexual marketplace. Just what attitudes and practices characterized a real man or a real woman? One easy way to establish a comfortable gender identity was to accentuate “heteronormality”, or complete emotional orientation to the opposite gender. In this context, therefore, homosexuality threatened the bond between man and woman, and it was important not only to define it as aberrant but also to avoid any practices that encouraged emotional openness to the same sex. Among other things, this resulted in the reduction of males’ reliance on each other, and in doing so, gave men even lesser reason to form the kinds of bonds with each other that they had in the past.

    With the birth of the stigmatized homosexual identity, we thus see the death of an affectionate freedom captured in this 1850 daguerreotype that is denied to men today. It is hard not to conclude that the erosion of male affection toward each other has come at great cost, not only to the lives of men into the present, but also to women as well.

  • Rachel Iafolla '18 An Abandoned America

    Why are ruins so evocative? What can they tell us about who we were then and who we are now? By Rachel Iafolla ’18

    "An Abandoned America" by Rachel Iafolla '18

    The Packard Plant was abandoned in 1956. Source: Detroiturbex.com

    The Packard Plant was abandoned in 1956. Source: Detroiturbex.com

    Photographs of abandoned structures have become an increasingly popular visual focus for contemporary photographers. Capturing the stillness of long, dark hallways, the crumbling walls of a once cherished home, and the remnants of previous lives has allowed people to travel through time with one single glance. The assumptions and stories which can be drawn from these images are boundless, thus capturing the imagination of photographers and viewers alike. But what story do they actually tell?

    The Packard Automotive Plant in Detroit, Michigan, pictured above, stands empty, yet it has much to say about the American Dream. Opened in 1903, it was once a sign of the power of American manufacturing. The plant produced millions of cars and during War II, the fighter planes, and engines for PT boats that helped win the war. After the plant closed, it was home to various other businesses, and was eventually fully vacated. Various attempts to buy and repurpose it have occurred over the years, but many have fallen through and issues with taxes have abounded (Detroit Free Press); it appears that the future of the plant is something of a mystery, and while ideas are in the works, it may be best to adopt an “I’ll believe it when I see it” mentality.

    The popularity of this photograph, however, is not due to the past or future of the pictured location, but rather to what it says about where we, as Americans, are now. Images like this one speaks to our anxieties and challenge our values. The picture of the Packard Plant reflects the dramatic economic changes the nation has experienced: from a booming factory manufacturing driven economy, to one that outsources and has an uncertain future. It sometimes seems that the American worker has been forgotten, much like these buildings. On a local level, the abandoned Packard Plant reflects the decline of Detroit, a city which filed for bankruptcy in 2013. When you inspect this image, as well as the thousands of other abandoned buildings scattered around Detroit, each one of which has its own rich history and grim enchantment, it is hard to believe that positive changes are possible. As a city and a nation worries about its economy, images of what once was creates a nostalgia for those booming American-made days.

    In terms of American values, images like this one address America’s tendency to embrace new technologies and look towards the next big thing. Instead of improving upon what we have, we want what is bigger and better, and thus we leave once great achievements behind. The Packard Automotive Plant highlights this idea, we have moved towards an era of technology, an era in which assembly line jobs are not as common. Many jobs that were once done in the plant, and others like it, have been moved overseas and replaced with tech-based jobs and industries. Nevertheless, the Packard building still stands, compelling people to appreciate its place in history and recognize its importance. This image reminds us of what we might lose in the changes that we do welcome.
    "An Abandoned America" by Rachel Iafolla '18

    This photograph of the Packard Plant draws the viewer into a depressed present, poised on a cusp between an irrecoverable past and an uncertain future. It tells a story of loss and hope. In broader terms, and aside from their eerie beauty, images like this one can haunt a viewer. These places were once filled with life and people, but now stand neglected. Yet, the photos of abandoned buildings can immortalize them and help us invoke the ghosts that still inhabit them. There is a oddly familiar quality to these desolate structures, which like old snapshots allow us to envision what went on there. Perhaps the fascination with these images comes from a fear that important places in our lives will someday stand empty; perhaps we are simply doing what we hope others will do for us, preserving the memory of lives once lived as a way of finding a thread of hope for their own lives and futures.

  • Andrew Esancy '17 Where the Buffalo Roam? The Story of the American Bison

    The virtual extermination of the American Bison was an environmental disaster. But the backstory is even worse. By Andrew Esancy ’17

    "Where the Buffalo Roam: The Story of the American Bison" By Andrew Esancy '17

    A pile of approximately 180,000 bison skulls waiting to be ground for fertilizer (c. mid-1870s). Copyright expired - Courtesy of the Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library - downloaded from English Wikipedia 14 December 2015.

    A pile of approximately 180,000 bison skulls waiting to be ground for fertilizer (c. mid-1870s). Copyright expired - Courtesy of the Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library - downloaded from English Wikipedia 14 December 2015.

    Prior to European Settlement, there were an estimated 60 million bison, or American Buffalo, in the continental United States. By the end of the nineteenth century, however, there were only approximately one thousand of these animals remaining. It is easy to see this as a cautionary tale about how human beings -- Americans in this case -- can so recklessly abuse the environment. After all, the immense decline in population was in part a result of environmental factors, such as regional drought, bovine disease and competition for resources with domesticated livestock, or cattle. In addition, there were other commercial motives. Buffalo products, especially their hides and to a lesser extent their meat, were valuable commodities and there for the taking as they belonged to no one.

    This photograph from the mid-1870s provides a window into the story of the Buffalo. In the image, two men stand triumphantly among an estimated 180,000 bison skulls. The identities of the men in the photograph are unknown. One has climbed to the very top of the pile. The picture resembles similar photos taken at the time and since by people to memorialize having reached the peak of an actual mountaintop. They often refer to having “conquered” the mountain. Here we see a similar gesture, except that the mountain in this case is grotesquely composed of the remains of thousands and thousands of living beings.

    In 1812, one M. Figuier, a pharmacist Montpellier in France, discovered that bone char or bone black could decolorize wines and vinegars better than the then prevailing method, which used charcoal. Following his discovery, the firm of Payen and Sons first introduced bone black to the sugar industry. Bone black was used to refine sugar and it also helped give sugar its white color by absorbing impurities. As it was common practice for bison hunters to leave the bison carcass to rot after they had killed them, by the early 1880s bone gathering and selling in the Midwest had become a thriving industry, to which the following advertisement posted in The Grafton News and Times on July 23, 1885 attests:

    I will pay cash for buffalo bones. Bring them in by the ton or hundred. I will give fifty pounds of the best twine for one ton of bones, for this month only, or a $40 sewing machine for forty tons.

    About half way up the right edge of the photograph there is a building in the background, the Michigan Carbon Works processing plant, which had been founded in 1873 by Deming Jarves and William Hooper. The company was established to meet the rapid demands of an expanding sugar industry by distilling animal bones into bone black that could be used to filter and purify sugar. Fortunately for human health considerations, growing public health consciousness and regulation prevented the Michigan Carbon Works from utilizing the spine and skull in the production process to prevent the spread of “Mad Cow” disease. But, in other ways the story of what happened to the Buffalo goes far beyond a tale of environmental profligacy and shows a complete lack of concern for human health and welfare.

    Sociological theory -- especially the Marxist inspired social conflict version -- tells us that society is composed of different groups competing for the same power and resources and that the more powerful groups use their power in order to exploit groups with less power. From this perspective, the tale of the buffalo gets dark indeed. European settlers understood that bison were essential to the survival of North American aboriginals in the form of sustenance and as a trade commodity, and so the United States government capitalized and supported the slaughter of bison by paying a bounty to bison hunters as a means of subjugating the Native Americans. Not being able to hunt roaming herds of buffalo, the tribes had no alternative but to surrender to the American military, give up their nomadic way of life and accept what the white man offered them, farming and herding on isolated reservations.

    This photograph of bison skulls, therefore, provides a strand of evidence that documents not only massive environmental abuse, but also a key element in the strategy to subjugate the Native American tribes who occupied the land that white settlers, and their government, wanted. Often, it is not so much what is depicted in the image that is important, but rather what we can discover about the backstory of the elements in the picture.

  • Image of Hannah Dalglish '16 at Cape of Good Hope South Africa Internship

    When Hannah Dalglish ’16 was considering summer internships, her sociology professors encouraged her to seek an experience abroad. She took the advice to heart.

  • Photo of Abigail Wing Left and Right-Gun Permits

    Views on gun permits are similar, across political parties by Abigail Wing ’18

    By Abigail Wing '18

    Who would have thought political parties could have such similar views on a controversial topic like gun permits? I am a proud Republican and entirely believe in the freedom to own and use guns, yet when I tell people I support firm gun laws and imposition of permits, they look at me in shock and say that I’m not much of a Republican with a viewpoint like that. Right-wings are all about handing guns to everyone and want to bypass any laws to regulate firearms, right? Wrong! The General Social Survey shows some surprising facts about gun permits and political views that many Americans are unaware of.

    Chart of public support for gun permits in US

    Data from General Social Survey

    While the More Conservative side has the lowest support amongst the Moderate and More Liberal political groups, over 70% of those who identify as More Conservative support gun permits. This data would surprise many people. The difference between the Most Liberal and Most Conservative group is only 10 percentage points. This is such a small difference in opinion, yet people still insist on believing that 100% of Republicans hate gun laws and 100% of Democrats don’t even want guns to be sold at all. Misconceptions abound in politics, so the idea that there is a massive gap between Republican and Democrat mindsets is not surprising. In reality there is not a wide gap between political parties.

    Many people accept information based purely on what others and the media tell them. Do some research and find out what the data says! Political parties argue and point fingers on television and in newspapers, but the GSS makes it clear that both sides have similar opinions concerning gun permits. Whether people say they are Democrats or Republicans, the differences between these parties are not as large as we once thought.

  • Photo of Nicholas Liotta '17 Trust in Government

    Why are we seeing such high levels of distrust for the American government? by Nick Liotta ’17

    By Nick Liotta '17

    Nowadays, if you were to go up to people walking down almost any street in in the United States and ask them, “How much confidence do you have that the individuals holding office in any of our three branches of government will do the “right thing” the majority of  the time?”, an overwhelming number of them would respond with “hardly any”. Cynicism and distrust for government has become a trend in the United States, specifically from the early 1970’s. Throughout the past four or so decades, a tremendous number of American citizens have followed along with this development of skepticism of the government, regardless of gender, political ideology, region of the country, or even the income and education levels of the individual. All of this begs the question, “Why are we seeing such  high levels of distrust for the American government?”

    According to the latest results from the General Social Survey (GSS), which was conducted in 2012, 47% of all Americans have “hardly any trust” in Congress, while only 7% responded saying they have a “great deal of trust”. Regarding the Executive Branch, 36% of respondents said they have “hardly any trust” while 15% said they had a “great deal of trust”. Numbers for the Supreme Court remained relatively constant throughout the past 40 years – about 30% of Americans have responded saying they have a “great deal of trust” and about 15% said they have “hardly any trust”. These percentages remain higher than the other two branches, perhaps mostly because Americans do not individually elect the   justices on the Court. Nevertheless, these high percentages of distrust highlight a growing and concerning problem in the United States. Below is a graph that depicts the percentages for “hardly and trust” for each branch of government:

    Trust in government in US.

    Data from General Social Survey

    The trend of cynicism that has continued to grow throughout American society is  one that needs special attention. These numbers reflect the opinions that many Americans have of the officials that are supposed to represent the people of this country. With numbers this low, it can undermine the ability of these officials to make important policy decisions, start initiatives and help make this country a better place to live. One can only assume that these numbers of distrust are going to continue to increase as the years go on. As the  number of political scandals continues to increase (i.e. Watergate), it gives the public even more of a concrete justification to be skeptical of the officials elected to office. It seems that although incumbents are replaced with new politicians, the majority of them fail to meet the expectations of the citizens who elected them.

    In order to see actual change in these percentages, it may take a complete revamp of the way these institutions are structured. All politicians, from Representatives to Senators and up to the President, should be held accountable for each and every single one of their actions while in office. The American people need to be assured that the people they elect to office will fulfill the promises that they make throughout their campaigns. That when any politician takes an oath into office, he or she will maintain the integrity of the office they are being elected to. That they will be working on behalf of the people, not for their own self interests. Any violation of such principles will be accounted for and it will solely be up to the people to decide what should be done as a consequence. The United States has continued to have relatively low levels of trust in comparison to other developed nations – if we want to see higher levels of trust, maybe it is time that we take some notes.

  • Stephanie Reeves How Have Attitudes Towards Working Mothers Changed?

    Has the image of the homemaker been displaced by images of today’s working woman? by Stephanie Reeves ’16

    By Stephanie Reeves '16

    From baking apple pies to waiting on husbands hand and foot, the image of the 1950’s perfect housewife doesn’t appear to be going away anytime soon. However that image is not reality. Today the Department of Labor estimates that 70% of mothers with children under 18 are participating in the labor force. So what has lead to this shift and have attitudes changed as women have moved into the labor force? Not too long ago mothers were only seen as homemakers, and now more than half work full or part time. Have the women of the generation that lived through this stereotype been replaced by the progressive women of today? To answer this question we can look at the data collected by the General Social Survey on attitudes towards working mothers.

    Chart showing perceptions of Family Life with Working Mother

    Data from General Social Survey

    The graph shows us a breakdown by generation of respondents that agreed that “… family life [will] suffer if the mom works full time?” The difference by generation is clear. Those in the oldest generation, the “GI”, born between 1901 and 1924 agree that family life will suffer more than those in other generations. This is in contrast with the youngest generation, the “Millennials”, born between the 1980’s to the early 2000’s. The data shows that when asked, the “GI” generation agrees nearly twice as often as Millenials. Also when looking at the graph as a whole we see that all the generations are disagreeing more in the last 10 years. So what does this mean for the future of working moms?

    As the older generations begin to die off and the younger ones grow up, I believe there will be an even larger increase in working mothers. The societal norm is changing and the stigma surrounding childcare are becoming less and less. The factors that may play into this are plenty. The passing of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 allows women to take jobs and then have children without fearing that their job will be lost. The economy has taken a downward turn in the past few years, which may have lead to more economic pressures on families. For the future this might mean paid maternity or even paternity leave and with more women in the work force, equal pay or job opportunities. Telecommunications giant, Vodafone, has been one of the first to take steps in the direction of paid maternity leave. They recently announced they would be giving a minimum of 16 weeks leave to all new mothers who work for the company in any of the 30 countries Vodafone operates in. Some states have also taken on the issue. California passed a paid paternity leave law that offered 6 weeks at 55% of pay for both mothers and fathers. New Jersey and Rhode Island followed California’s efforts soon after. While efforts are being made on company and state levels, a national program is the way of the future, so all working mothers are given the same benefits. The goal for mothers will no longer be fulfilling the role of the perfect housewife but to find the balance between working and being a mother.

    Sources:
    General Social Survey Cumulative Datafile (1972-2012)
    US Department of Labor, Data and Statistics, Women in the Labor Force