Target goes gender-neutral and customers respond

This post was written by Sanah Jivani, introductory sociology student, and recently appeared in The Sociological Cinema.  An earlier version appeared in SoUnequal under the title Target hopes to change the norms. 

This local newscast covers a recent Target store's removal of the "boys" and "girls" sections to go gender-neutral. They note the store is changing the symbolic pink and blue background colors to neutral colors. While in the past, girls played with Barbies and boys played with action figures, Target is transcending these distinctions to enable different toys,electronics, and bedding goods to appeal across gender boundaries. They note their decision to go gender-neutral is based on "customer feedback" and that separate girls and boys sections are "not necessary." Some customers reacted negatively to the switch,stating "Can you say publicity stunt?", "RIDICULOUS!!!", and "No longer a fan or opper of Target." In effect, these customers are policing the gender binary. One of the news shows' interns praises Target for the move toward "gender equality" and enabling children to "create their own person and not have to choose one thing because that's what they're supposed to choose" For related videos, viewers may want to check out similar debates about a J. Crew advertisement, a 5-year old boy who loves to wear dresses, efforts to make gender-neutral Legos, Fox news analysts that mock gender-neutral bathrooms, and a peer sex educator that breaks down the gender binary. 

a man in the park

Kim Aronson, a Bay Area videographer, has a special talent for telling simple, yet poignant stories drawn from peoples' biographies. Here he interviews a stranger on a park bench who talks about his experience with the police and the legal system that has contributed to his present homeless situation. See this video and other examples of his work at his YouTube site.

snobby white chicks

This post was contributed by Nari Kim from this fall's introductory sociology class. This post was later cross-posted to The Sociological Cinema.

In this clip from the movie White Chicks, FBI agents, Kevin and Marcus (played by Shawn Wayans and Marlon Wayans), pick up the Vandergeld twins whom they are to supposed to protect. The sisters (played by Brittany Daniel and Jaime KIng) are white, young, and rich, as shown through their consumption of expensive goods such as private jet and designer clothes. Upon meeting, one sister demeans the agents by declaring “we already gave to the United Negro Fund.” Taken a bit back, the agents explain that they are supposed to drive them to their destination and protect them while there. In response, the women throw their bags at the agents and order them to clean up their dog's mess. As they get situated in the car, Marcus is surprised to discover that he is relegated to the cargo area as his seat is reserved for the dog. While driving, the women further bask in their privilege, noting that this isn't just “a” week, but “the” week at the Hamptons, and that only the "hottest of the hottest" (i.e., themselves) will be on the cover of the local magazine, detailing the lives of the rich and famous. In all, the twins make no effort to disguise their assumption of superiority to the agents by virtue of race and class. This clip would serve to humorously introduce any of several important stratification-relevant concepts, including status inequality, white privilege, and conspicuous consumption. 

prestige in pink

This post was contributed by Jackie Davila from this fall's undergrad social stratification course. This post was later cross-posted to The Sociological Cinema. 

The movie Pretty in Pink centers on a budding romance between Andie and Blane. Andie is from the “wrong side of the tracks,” and lives with her father, a down-and-out kind of guy whom she continually urges to get a decent job. However, she is a refreshing, free-spirit counterpoint to Blane, a “richie” who drives a fancy car, throws cool parties, dates the popular girls, and lives in a big house with well-manicured lawn. Her social status is obviously inferior to his, making this intimate teen encounter one that is complicated by not only social inequality, but by social exclusion and rejection, as well.

At school, Blane takes a shine to Andie. But given that both are expected to hang out with their own kind, they soon encounter resistance from friends and associates. In this scene, Andie confronts Blane on his denying to others that they are a dating couple. Andie knows he is embarrassed to be seen with her, but she nevertheless confronts him openly in the hallway during the school day. Although the scene suggests that all is over for the couple, they soon rekindle their romance when they later cross paths at the prom.

Interestingly, the book upon which the movie is based had Andie winding up at the prom with a selfless, working-class boy who had loved Andie all along. However, according to the movie's wikipedia entry, the ending for the movie was changed to reflect test-audience preference for Andie with Blane, underlining the cultural ideal that "true love conquers all."  

Love thwarted by prestige differences resonates strongly as a trope in contemporary popular culture as is evident in movies such as Pretty Woman, and in one of my favorites, The Notebook, wherein the rich guy/poor gal is reversed as Noah, a simple country boy, falls hard for heiress, Allie. Showing the above clip from Pretty in Pink, or one from The Notebook (e.g. this scene) would work well as a discussion-starter in any course that addresses the social context of intimate relationships.

from Jose to Joe = job search success

The following post was contributed by Laurie Gleason, student in my Fall, 2014 Social Stratification class.                                               
With the ongoing concern over illegal immigration, Hispanics still find themselves routinely overlooked for decent jobs, regardless of their citizenship status. Many Americans feel immigrants serve a "worthwhile" purpose by taking unskilled labor positions like field work or housekeeping--backbreaking, under-compensated work which most Americans feel is beneath them.

Cate Matthews in a recent Huffington Post article describes José Zamora's futile attempts to obtain gainful employment until he Americanized his name. As José, he claims he did not receive a single inquiry, despite placing as many as 100 applications per day. However, "Joe," sporting the same résumé, received job offers from the exact same companies shortly after he applied. 

In this modern age, where applications are submitted online, does a person's name become the simple key for unlocking the door to a decent job? The video "Jose vs. Joe" clearly relates to the larger question of the continuing role of status ascription as critical for achievement in societies, such as ours, that purport to be meritocracies. 

Students interested in exploring this issue further should address research that has been done in this area, such as the Bertrand and Mullainathan study conducted over a decade ago that is now a classic.   

the science of inequality

Check out the special May 23 issue of Science devoted to examining the science of inequality. According to editors, Chin and Culotta:
This special issue uses...  fresh waves of data to explore the origins, impact, and future of inequality around the world. Archaeological and ethnographic data are revealing how inequality got its start in our ancestors (see pp. 822 and 824). New surveys of emerging economies offer more reliable estimates of people's incomes and how they change as countries develop (see p. 832). And in the past decade in developed capitalist nations, intensive effort and interdisciplinary collaborations have produced large data sets, including the compilation of a century of income data and two centuries of wealth data into the World Top Incomes Database (WTID) (see p. 826 and Piketty and Saez, p.838).
It all makes for great reading, so check to see if your library subscribes to the journal.

invisible homeless

The New York City Rescue Mission recently distributed a video to suggest just how invisible the homeless are--even to presumably well-meaning people. Close relatives, who dressed and posed as homeless, went unnoticed as their loved ones passed by on the street. Their reactions to being informed of their failure to recognize them are most compelling. The video does not suggest how many passers-by actually recognized pretending-to-be-homeless relatives. See the Rescue Mission's project at http://www.makethemvisible.com/.

turning the tables on everyday sexism...

Leah Green turns the tables on men by playing an in-your-face sexual harasser on the streets of London in this video featured in a recent article in The Guardian. In doing so, she is trying to sensitize men to how it feels to be the object of sexism by simply relating to men in the same ways many men interact with women in public space.

Quoting Green in her article:

As is usual when men make inappropriate sexual remarks to me, I felt embarrassed. This time, at least, there was a slight silver lining, as it was a perfect scenario to recreate for my film, in which I tested out real sexist situations on men. I took tweets from @EverdaySexism, where women (and men) recount sexist incidents and, using hidden cameras, acted these out on unsuspecting members of the public. Since launching the film on the Guardian website on Friday it has garnered more than a million hits and nearly three thousand comments.           

Responses have been varied. Women have said that the film, which uses comedy to make a serious point, highlights perfectly the kind of harassment they receive on a daily basis. Many men have said that the words coming from the mouth of a woman made them realise their weight and impact. However, others felt the film was cruel, and that subjecting innocent men to sexually aggressive comments made me no better than the men who do that, thus completely undermining the feminist message. Those are the criticisms I would like to answer.