Week 2 Notes (Schneider and Igram, Spector and Kitsuse) PDF

Preview

Summary

Notes from lecture and class discussion with Professor Mosley...

Description

Schneider and Ingram Overview ● Humans, in general, tend to identify with specific groups, and then socially construct other groups that are seen as “different” ● These differences then get evaluated in positive or negative ways ● Classic examples: race, gender, ethnicity ● Although there may be real group differences, the fact that we evaluate these differences as positive or negative is the result of social constructions ● All groups participate in this, not just advantaged ones ○ Disadvantaged groups may make sub-groups that are better/worse ○ Western feminists think middle eastern women need to freed and hijabi women think western women need to stop being exploited (it’s a matter of perspective) ● Policy reinforces, entrenches, exploits, or challenges our conceptions of those differences ○ The group becomes tied to the policy in ways that may be exploitive (or not) ○ Narrative around gun violence: black people and urban crime ○ AIDS was originally viewed as a problem that was only tied to gay men ● Perceptions of group differences and the problems that result from them are hard to change, particularly when policies get made that treat the groups as different ○ Difference in penalties between crack and powdered cocaine (criminalization of crack bc its the drug black people use, whereas you get a slap on the wrist for cocaine because it's fun and for rich white people) ● Examples of things that can either create new social constructions or change them: events, social movements, scientific advances, social science research, demographic shifts ○ Demographic shifts: more women in the workplace change sexual harassment from “women don’t have a sense of humor” to “men are disgusting” ● One benefit of being in a “deserving” social group means that the social problems you care about get dealt with. Ex. working class whites & immigration crackdown vs. exfelons and access to jobs ● Ultimately, social constructions are what lead us to understand why certain problems are happening and who is to blame for it--who or what needs changing ● This influences our policy choices, and renders them more or less fair, efficient ,and effective Spector & Kitsuse Overview ● Social problems = “claims making activities” ...NOT conditions ○ It’s not the features of the problem itself, but rather how the activities of people surrounding the issue represent it ● They are the “activities of those who assert the existence of conditions and define them as the problems” and “the work of many people--journalists, doctors, politicians, social workers, etc.” ● A ‘claim’ is a statement or argument that asserts itself as true (it may or may not actually

be true) Social problems are ‘putative’ because from the social constructionist perspective, it does not matter whether the condition actually exists or not ● This is not to say that some problems do not have a factual basis, just that the “reality” of the problem is irrelevant ● Spector & Kitsuse argue that values are just “linguistic devices that participants use to articulate their claims, or to persuade others to legitimate them.” (p. 74) ● From this perspective values do not cause people to define certain conditions as problems, they are tools that we use when we talk about certain conditions being problems ● Values are the explanations people give in support of their claims ○ “Immigrants shouldn’t come to america because they don’t have the same patriotic, american values” this is fake. Value claims can’t be reliably interpreted because they are attached to specific results. ○ Pro-lifers vs pro-choice values ○ Freedom from vs freedom to Interests vs Values ● Traditionally, interest groups are thought of as groups that have some kind of real or material stake in a policy outcome, and values groups are those that are involved form more altruistic reasons ● BUT, interest groups often use values based language to legitimate their claims, and values groups often develop real and material interests that they need to protect ○ The NRA uses almost entirely values-based language (freedom etc.) but obviously has a huge interest in keeping guns in america ● SO, values are an observable feature of social problems, not explanations of why we see some things as problems and not others. ● value s statements are data about how we understand social problems The difficulty in separating out the differences between these two is why they want you to see values as a form of data ●

The Role of Causal Stories ● Causal stories: the narrative story lines and symbolic devices claimsmakers use to manipulate issue characteristics ○ “All the while making it seem as though they are simply describing facts” ● Causal stories: 1. Describe the harm caused be the problem 2. Attribute the cause of the problem to actions of other individuals or organizations and 3. In the process claim that we should act or intervene to stop the harm that is being caused ● Causal stories help us understand what the problem is and who or what caused it--and essential precursor to created a policy solution ● What we attribute the cause fo the problem to helps shape what we will do about it ● Most problems have multiple causal stories told about them-- there is a quest for dominance in the policymaking arena. Problems for which one causal story becomes dominant are more likely to be acted on

Integrative Thinking/Assignment Prep Social Problem: food deserts (access to healthy foods) How is this problem socially constructed? What is the alternative explanation? What causal stories are invoked? How and when was it first identified as a problem? Was there a specific defining event? Were interest groups involved? What has the role of mass media been? How has the problem become socially endorsed? By who? What are the claims and counter claims? Who has a vested interest in the status quo? Who has a vested interest in certain other definitions? 1. Socially constructed as poor people don’t know how to eat healthy? Alternative explanation is the social construction of people choosing not to eat healthier foods. The real thing is that there are no incentives to bring produce into these areas because it is more expensive. Causal stories about food stamps being used poorly? Would need to research more. 2. I have absolutely no idea. In terms of school lunches the “pizza as a vegetable” moment mobilized a lot of people. Interest groups became especially involved with Michelle Obama. 3. Mass media largely does not cover this. Socially endorsed by the likes of Michelle etc. National movement for healthier kids is real but the complexities means no one looks at the minutia (the intricacies of the causal story is one of the reasons there is so much inaction! huzzah!) 4. Claims are that systematic racism and the effects of redlining still felt in status quo are reasons that poor areas do not have access to healthy food. Counter claim is that people are lazy/unhealthy. High key though is this a social problem? Should probably ask....