CH-21-22 Collective Behavior and Social Movements – Sociology : Chapter Notes

This Document Contains Chapters 21 to 22 CHAPTER 21 COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS CHAPTER OUTLINE THEORIES OF COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR Emergent-Norm Perspective Value-Added Perspective Assembling Perspective FORMS OF COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOR Crowds Disaster Behavior Fads and Fashions Panics and Crazes Rumors Publics and Public Opinion SOCIAL MOVEMENTS Relative Deprivation Approach Resource Mobilization Approach Gender and Social Movements New Social Movements COMMUNICATIONS AND THE GLOBALIZATION OF SOCIAL MOVEMENTS SOCIAL POLICY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENTS: Disability Rights Boxes Trend Spotting: Gun Control: The Public Speaks Sociology in the Global Community: Women and Social Movements in India Research Today: Organizing for Controversy on the Web LEARNING OBJECTIVES WHAT’S NEW IN CHAPTER 21 1. Discuss the various theories of collective behavior. 2. Describe the nature of disaster behaviors. 3. Discuss behavior patterns associated with fads and fashion. 4. Describe the nature of panics and crazes. 5. Discuss the nature of rumors. 6. Describe the nature, extent, and explanations of social movements. 7. Discuss the globalization of social movements. 8. Discuss the movement for disability rights. • Chapter-opening excerpt from The Global Grapevine: Why Rumors of Terrorism, Immigration, and Trade Matter, by Gary Alan Fine and Bill Ellis • Trend Spotting Box, “Gun Control: The Public Speaks” • Discussion of the mobilization of social movements by institutional insiders CHAPTER SUMMARY Collective behavior is usually unstructured and spontaneous, which makes it difficult for sociologists to generalize about people’s behavior in such situations. According to the emergent norm perspective, emergent norms in collective behavior reflect shared convictions held by members of the group and are enforced through sanctions. The value-added model was developed by Neil Smelser to explain how broad social conditions are transformed in a definite pattern into some form of collective behavior. Smelser’s model outlines six determinants of collective behavior: 1) structural conduciveness, 2) structural strain, 3) generalized belief, 4) precipitating factor, 5) mobilized for action, and 6) manner that social control is exercised. The assembling perspective incorporates periodic assemblies, which include recurring gatherings of people, and nonperiodic assemblies that include less formal assemblies. Various forms of behavior patterns comprise collective behavior. Crowds are temporary gatherings of people in close proximity that share a common focus or interest. Disaster behavior refers to a sudden or disruptive event or set of events that overtaxes a community’s responses, so that outside aid is necessary. Fads are temporary patterns of behavior involving large numbers of people. Fashions are pleasurable mass involvements that feature a certain amount of acceptance by society and have a line of historical continuity. Crazes are exciting mass involvements that last for a relatively long period. Panic is a fearful arousal or collective flight based on a generalized belief that may or may not be accurate. Rumors are pieces of information gathered informally that are used to interpret an ambiguous situation. Public opinion refers to expressions of attitudes on matters of public policy that are communicated to decision makers. Social movements are the most all-encompassing type of collective behaviors. Social movements refer to organized collective activities to bring about or resist fundamental change in an existing group or society. Social movements imply the existence of conflict, but we can also analyze their activities from a functionalist perspective, which views social movements as training grounds for leaders of the political establishment. Sociologists rely on two explanations, relative deprivation and resource mobilization, to understand why people mobilize. The term relative deprivation is defined as the conscious feeling of a negative discrepancy between legitimate expectations and present actualities. It may be characterized as a scarcity rather than a lack of necessities. A relatively deprived person is dissatisfied because he or she feels downtrodden relative to some appropriate reference group. A group will not mobilize into a social movement unless there is a shared perception that its relative deprivation can be ended through collective action. Resource mobilization refers to the ways in which a social movement utilizes such resources as money, political influence, access to the media, and personnel. Leadership is a central factor in mobilization of the discontented into social movements. Karl Marx recognized the importance of recruitment when he called on workers to become aware of their oppressed status. Gender is an important element to understanding social movements. In a male-dominated society, women find it more and more difficult to assume leadership positions in social movement organizations. New social movements refer to organized collective activities that address values and social identities as well as improvements in the quality of life. The impact of the latest technology on various forms of collective behavior is of interest to sociologists. Internet chatrooms allow nonperiodic assemblies of people that can develop a large collective of like-minded people, such as Greenpeace. Sociologists refer to such electronic enhancement of established social movements as computer-mediated communication (CMC). RESOURCE INTEGRATOR 1. How have sociologists explained collective behavior? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: emergent norm perspective, value-added model, assembling perspective, periodic assemblies, non-periodic assemblies Visual Support: Photo of Wal-Mart opening; Photo of children in line; Photo of antiwar protesters in Seoul IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 21-1 Classroom Discussion Topics: 21-2, 21-3 2. What are the key forms of collective behavior? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: crowd, disaster, fad, fashion, craze, panic, rumor, public, public opinion Box: Trend Spotting, “Gun Control: The Public Speaks” Visual Support: Photo of NYC emergency command center; Photo of flooded home in New Orleans; Photo of “planking”; Photo of whispering rumors; Table 21-1 “Forms of Collective Behavior” IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 21-1, 21-2, 21-3 Classroom Discussion Topics: 21-2, 21-3, 21-4, 21-5 3. What is a social movement? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: social movement Visual Support: Photo of PETA protestors IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 21-4, 21-5 Classroom Discussion Topics: 21-6, 21-7, 21-8 Topics and Sources for Student Research: Labor Activism in South Korea; Vegetarianism as a Social Movement; Networking Between Movements; Anti-Immigrant Social Movements Video Resources: The Men’s Movement; Social Action REEL SOCIETY CD Topic Index: Social Movements 4. What are the main theoretical perspectives on social movements? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: relative deprivation, resource mobilization, false consciousness, new social movements Visual Support: Photos of demonstrators for indigenous Indian tribe; Photos of Gallaudet University protest; Table 21-2, “Contributions to Social Movement Theory” 5. How has technology affected the mobilization of social movements? IN THE TEXT Box: Sociology in the Global Community, “Women and New Social Movements in India” Box: Research Today, “Organizing for Controversy on the Web” Video Resources: Mass Media in Society LECTURE OUTLINE Introduction I. Theories of Collective Behavior • Collective behavior is usually unstructured and spontaneous. Example: Rock concert tragedies. A. Emergent-Norm Perspective • Crowds are affected by norms and procedures. • Ralph Turner and Lewis Killian suggest an emergent norm reflects shared convictions held by members of groups that are enforced through sanctions. • There is latitude for a wide range of acts. Example: Pushing in a crowd. B. Value-Added Perspective • Neil Smelser outlined six determinants in the valued-added model: 1) structural conduciveness, 2) structural strain, 3) generalized belief, 4) precipitating factor, 5) mobilized for action, and 6) manner that social control is exercised. • Sociologists have questioned both emergent norm and value-added perspective due to their imprecise definitions and lack of empirical testing. C. Assembling Perspective • McPhail and Miller suggested the assembling perspective using the interactionist approach. • Periodic assemblies refer to recurring routine gatherings. Example: Work groups or college classes. • Nonperiodic assemblies include demonstrations, parades, gatherings at scenes of fires or accidents. II. Forms of Collective Behavior A. Crowds • A crowd is a temporary gathering of people in close proximity that share a common focus or interest. Example: Spectators at a sporting event. • Even during riots, crowds may exhibit structure. Richard Beck and Howard Aldrich analyzed patterns of vandalism. Perceptions of exploitation may lead to attack. Example: Looters in Baghdad. B. Disaster Behavior • Refers to a sudden or disruptive event or set of events that overtax a community’s resources, so that outside aid is necessary. Example: explosions, floods, and earthquakes. 1. Disaster Research • Disaster Research Center at University of Delaware has been used to develop effective planning in response to various disasters. 2. Case Study: Collapse of the World Trade Center and Hurricane Katrina • Decision making becomes more centralized during emergency periods than it is in normal times. • Communication is vital to such efforts. C. Fads and Fashions • Fads are temporary patterns of behavior involving large numbers of people. • Fashions are pleasurable mass involvements that feature a certain amount of acceptance by society and have a line of continuity. Example: Punk haircuts. • Fads and fashions allow people to identify with something different from the dominant institution. • Fads are generally short-lived with lack of interest by most nonparticipants. D. Panics and Crazes • A craze is an exciting mass involvement that lasts for a relatively long period. Example: Stockpiling of toilet paper in 1973. • A panic is a fearful arousal or collective flight based on a generalized belief that may or may not be accurate. Example: In battlefields or stock market crashes. • One of the most famous: The War of the Worlds broadcast. E. Rumors • Rumors are pieces of information gathered informally that are used to interpret an ambiguous situation. • Rumors provide function through shared belief. Also they are a means of adapting to change. Example: Business takeovers. • Scary rumors probably spread the fastest. F. Publics and Public Opinion • Public refers to a dispersed group of people, not necessarily in contact with one another, who share an interest in an issue. • Public opinion refers to expressions of attitudes on matters of public policy that are communicated to decision makers. • Polls and surveys are used to assess public opinion. G. Social Movements • Social movements refer to organized collective activities to bring about or resist fundamental change in an existing group or society. • Social movements imply the existence of conflict. Example: Contraceptives. 1. Relative Deprivation • Relative deprivation is the conscious feeling of negative discrepancy between legitimate expectations and present actualities. Relatively deprived people are dissatisfied because they feel downtrodden relative to some appropriate group. Example: Blue-collar workers. • People must feel they have a right to their goals and that they deserve better, for social movements to occur. • A group will not mobilize into a social movement unless there is a shared perception that it can end its relative deprivation. • Critics charge that people do not have to feel deprived to act. 2. Resource Mobilization • Resource mobilization refers to the ways in which a social movement utilizes resources such as money, political influence, access to media, and workers. • As people become part of a social movement, norms develop to guide their behavior. Example: New words or special language. • Leadership is central to mobilization. • Karl Marx stressed the importance of recruitment to promote awareness of being oppressed. Example: False consciousness. 3. Gender and Social Movements • Gender bias causes the extent of women’s influence to be overlooked. • Sociopolitical systems tend to focus on male-dominated corridors of power. Example: Legislatures and corporate boardrooms. 4. New Social Movements • Refers to organized collective activities that address values and social identities as well as improvements in the quality of life. • Educated, middle-class people are significantly represented in new social movements. Example: Women’s movements, and gay and lesbian rights. • The environmental social movement is one of many movements that have adopted a worldwide focus, exemplifying the global nature of new social movements. III. Communications and the Globalization of Collective Behavior • Impact of the latest technology on various forms of collective behavior is of interest to sociologists. Example: Electronic enhancement of established social movements, or computer-mediated communication (CMC). IV. Social Policy and Social Movements: Disability Rights A. The Issue • The movement for disability rights. B. The Setting • ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) was passed in 1990. • Businesses with a certain number of employees cannot refuse to hire someone with a disability. Reasonable accommodations must be made. C. Sociological Insights • The labeling perspective would see the ADA as a significant framing of the issue of disability rights. • Conflict theorists see the mobilization of resources on behalf of people with disabilities as part of a 40-year civil rights movement. D. Policy Initiatives • Today, new disability issues are being considered, such as visitability. KEY TERMS Assembling perspective A theory of collective behavior introduced by McPhail and Miller that seeks to examine how and why people move from different points in space to a common location. Collective behavior In the view of sociologist Neil Smelser, the relatively spontaneous and unstructured behavior of a group of people who are reacting to a common influence in an ambiguous situation. Craze An exciting mass involvement that lasts for a relatively long period. Crowd A temporary gathering of people in close proximity who share a common focus or interest. Disaster A sudden or disruptive event or set of events that overtaxes a community’s resources so that outside aid is necessary. Emergent-norm perspective A theory of collective behavior proposed by Turner and Killian that holds that a collective definition of appropriate and inappropriate behavior emerges during episodes of collective behavior. Fad A temporary pattern of behavior that involves large numbers of people and is independent of preceding trends. False consciousness A term used by Karl Marx to describe an attitude held by members of a class that does not accurately reflect their objective position. Fashion A pleasurable mass involvement in some particular taste or lifestyle that has a line of historical continuity. New social movement An organized collective activity that addresses values and social identities, as well as improvements in the quality of life. Nonperiodic assembly A nonrecurring gathering of people that often results from word-of-mouth information. Panic A fearful arousal or collective flight based on a generalized belief that may or may not be accurate. Periodic assembly A recurring, relatively routine gathering of people, such as a college class. Public A dispersed group of people, not necessarily in contact with one another, who share an interest in an issue. Public opinion Expressions of attitudes on matters of public policy that are communicated to decision makers. Relative deprivation The conscious feeling of a negative discrepancy between legitimate expectations and present actualities. Resource mobilization The ways in which a social movement utilizes such resources as money, political influence, access to the media, and personnel. Rumor A piece of information gathered informally that is used to interpret an ambiguous situation. Social movement An organized collective who undertake activities to bring about or resist fundamental change in an existing group or society. Value-added model A theory of collective behavior proposed by Neil Smelser to explain how broad social conditions are transformed in a definite pattern into some form of collective behavior. Visitablity The accessibility of private homes to visitors with disabilities. ADDITIONAL LECTURE IDEAS 21-1: Types of Crowds Since the term crowds embraces such diverse kinds of groups, sociologists have found it helpful to adopt a typology introduced by Herbert Blumer. Blumer differentiates between crowds on the basis of their purposes in gathering. The casual crowd has a momentary existence and very little unity. There is virtually no social organization, for example, in casual crowds that gather in front of department store window displays. Conventional crowds are groups such as spectators at athletic events or audiences at lectures or plays. While still relatively temporary in terms of duration, conventional crowds are governed by certain social norms. In most instances, it is considered acceptable to talk to one’s neighbor during a basketball game but not during a serious dramatic play. In the remaining types of crowds, the behavior of participants is governed by new social norms, or what Turner and Killian refer to as emergent norms. Expressive crowds are temporary gatherings that provide for emotional expression and release. Examples include victory celebrations, religious revival meetings, and the annual Mardi Gras parade in New Orleans. Interestingly, expressive crowds often have a shared style of dress, common chants and gestures (“we’re number one!”), and an understanding of the bounds of acceptable behavior. Although such crowds may deviate from normal social conventions, as is the case with college fans who dance in the streets after an important football victory, they are generally not destructive or violent. An acting crowd joins in group action directed toward achieving some goal. Typically, this type of crowd feels dissatisfied and is quite volatile. An expressive crowd may also be angry, but an acting crowd transforms its hostility into action. While members of an acting crowd don’t necessarily approve of violence, they cooperate in such behavior, or, at the very least, do not prevent others in the crowd from being violent. Thus, mobs and rioters are both considered examples of acting crowds. A mob typically attempts to accomplish a limited objective, such as beating up one person or storming one embassy. Perhaps the most notorious and ugliest form of mob behavior in the United States is that of the lynch mob. Nearly 5,000 Americans were lynched between 1882 and 1951, of whom almost three-fourths were Black. Many had been accused of serious crimes by White mobs and then executed through acts of vigilante “justice.” It would be naïve to assume that mobs necessarily act without the approval of law enforcement agencies or powerful political leaders. While the lynching of Blacks continued for decades, legislators successfully blocked efforts beginning in 1919 to pass a federal law against lynching. Although the United Nations began investigations of lynchings in the United States in 1946, Congress never passed legislation making it a federal crime. In the view of conflict theorists, powerful individuals and groups in American society allowed lynchings to take place so that Blacks could be kept in a subservient position. Unlike mobs, rioters lack a sharp focus. Participants frequently have the same sense of injustice and collective outrage shared by members of a mob. However, rioters are much less clear on how to achieve their objective. Not surprisingly, then, there is often a common feeling after a riot that little has been accomplished. A 1981 survey of Liberty City residents found that most saw rioting as ineffective in leading to social change. Only 15 percent agreed with the statement that “Blacks can only get ahead by fighting in the streets.” In the aftermath of the violent 1980 Miami riots, Blacks were no more optimistic about the future than they had been before the outbreak. See Roger Brown, “Mass Phenomena.” In Gardner Lindzey, ed. Handbook of Social Psychology, vol. 2. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1954, pp. 847–854. See also Frederick Tasker, “Riot Flames Are Out, but Anger Smolders,” Miami Herald (April 12, 1981): 12. 21-2: Contaminated Coke and the Ethics of Rumor Research In 1976, a rumor surfaced in France that caused alarm among many major producers of beverages and food. Beginning then and continuing to the present, “the leaflet of Villejuif” has appeared all over France, to the extent that sociologist J.N. Kapferer has estimated that 43 percent of all homemakers have been exposed to it. The leaflet, whose origins are unknown, is a typewritten, one-page throwaway that identifies 10 popular products—such as Coca-Cola, Schweppes, and Martini—as containing cancer-causing additives. The leaflet says that although the foods have been authorized in France, the internationally famous cancer-research hospital in the Paris suburb of Villejuif—hence the term leaflet of Villejuif—has confirmed the contamination. No acknowledged health professionals subscribe to the warnings in the leaflet of Villejuif, and the hospital named has consistently denied the alleged dangers. However, it is the food producers who stand to lose as the leaflet continues to circulate, even showing up in translated form in other European nations. To study the leaflet’s impact, Kapferer distributed 500 copies in the mailboxes of a middle-class suburb of Rennes, a French provincial town. One week later, 150 people were interviewed about their reaction. More than two-thirds indicated that they planned to stop buying the products listed. Kapferer and his associates let the interviewees know that the claims made in the leaflet were not true. Rumors are often interesting, and Kapferer was clearly pleased by the opportunity to do empirical research. However, criticism was quick to follow. For example, Tom Smith of NORC expressed the following concerns: 1. Only 150 subjects in the 500 manipulated households were told that the information in the leaflet was untrue. The people agreeing to be interviewed were the only ones warned that the information was false. 2. Even the 150 subjects who were later warned were subjected to a week of possible anxiety over alleged health threats. And once warned, they could still be upset by the manipulation or their gullibility. 3. Kapferer presented evidence that 70 percent shared the leaflet’s misinformation outside their household. The researchers never told these others that the leaflet was full of untruths. 4. Also based on the follow-up interview, commercial interests did lose sales as a result, and were needlessly harmed. Smith believes that the Rennes experiment violates the Code of Professional Ethics and Standards of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, which provides general ethical standards for the social sciences and specifically states: “We shall strive to avoid the use of practices or methods that may harm, humiliate, or seriously mislead survey respondents.” Kapferer acknowledges the concerns but dismisses them, saying that he received the cooperation of the brands mentioned (including the legal departments) for the small-scale experiment. Indeed, the alleged “contaminated” brands funded the study. It is true that 350 subjects in the experiment were never told the truth, but Kapferer points out that this was also true for the vast majority of the 6 million households that had received the leaflet since it was first distributed in 1976. Further probing did not turn up any townspeople who were upset or overly anxious over the alleged health threats. Kapferer does share Smith’s concern about researching the effect of rumors and wonders if it is possible without breaching some ethical concerns. See J. N. Kapferer, “A Mass Poisoning Rumor in Europe,” Public Opinion Quarterly 53 (Winter 1989): 467–481. See also Tom W. Smith, “Comment,” Public Opinion Quarterly 54 (Fall 1990): 463. See also Kapferer, “Reply,” Public Opinion Quarterly 54 (Fall 1990): 464. 21-3: Exit Polling in the Former Soviet Union Exit polls have been a fact of life in the United States and other Western democracies for more than a decade. In recent years, such polling has been successfully conducted in certain developing countries, notably Mexico. But, in 1993, pollsters addressed the formidable logistics and methodological challenges of surveying a country as vast and politically chaotic as Russia. As television viewers in the United States have learned, exit polls allow the networks to project the outcome of an election long before all the ballots have been counted. Using sophisticated sampling techniques, interviewers question voters as they leave the polling places (hence the term exit polls). By studying voting patterns in selected districts, analysts can project the results for an entire city or state. Exit polling was introduced in Russia in 1993 when a referendum was held to determine the level of support for President Boris Yeltsin and his social and political reforms. Voter Research and Surveys (VRS), a polling firm based in the United States, drew on data from Russia’s 1991 presidential elections to develop a representative sample of voters, taking into account such factors as administrative region, type of city or settlement, and political orientation. VRS found that Russian voters were quite willing to speak with interviewers, despite the fact that both democracy and polling are rather new to that country. Indeed, according to Warren Mitofsky, the head of VRS, Russian voters’ rate of cooperation with pollsters was much higher than the rate in the United States. As in the United States, the exit polling in Russia proved to be fairly accurate. Early on the day of the referendum, based on initial analysis of survey data, exit polls began reporting a strong showing of support for Boris Yeltsin. VRS reported that 65 percent of voters had expressed confidence in the president, while a competing polling firm reported a 63-percent approval rating. The final returns of the referendum showed a 59-percent vote of confidence for Yeltsin. A second referendum question asked voters: “Do you approve of the government’s social and economic policies conducted by the President and the Government since 1992?” In the exit polls, 56 to 58 percent of those surveyed voiced their approval, as did 53 percent of voters in the referendum. As in other countries, exit polls in Russia provided information about the preferences of particular types of voters that cannot be obtained from official vote tallies. For example, exit polls showed that support for Boris Yeltsin was stronger among younger voters and those with less education. Yet, even at best, exit polls reflect the attitudes of voters who are not necessarily a representative sample of all members of a society. The top 40 percent of Russian adults who did not participate in the 1993 referendum are likely to be more critical of the government and its policies than the 60 percent who did vote. On all accounts, the initial exit polling in Russia was judged a success. The total cost was $40,000, about half the expense of a similar effort in the United States. Cooperation from voters was high, while interference from police, local politicians, and the traditional communist bureaucracy was minimal. The most serious difficulty faced by VRS was that Russia had a dated telecommunications system. Nevertheless, it is expected that such surveys will become more common in Russia and other parts of the former Soviet Union. Sources for the lecture include the following: Amy Corning, “The Russian Referendum: An Analysis of Exit Poll Results,” RFE/RL Research Report 2 (May 7, 1993): 6–9; Richard Morin, “Welcome to the World of Exit Surveys,” Washington Post National Weekly Edition 10 (May 3, 1993): 37; and Alexander Raht, “Yeltsin Receives Support in Referendum,” RFE/RL News Briefs 2 (April 30, 1993): 1. 21-4: Why Do People Join Social Movements? There are numerous organized efforts in the United States to bring about or prevent social change. Why do people join some movements and not others? Are some factors more significant in explaining recruitment to one type of social movement as opposed to another? Sociologist James M. Jasper and Han D. Poulsen of New York University collected data at protests to learn more about why people join each of two different social movements—animal rights and anti-nuclear power. They sampled the people present at the protest at Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant in August 1984, people at a rally of about 1,000 people protesting experiments on monkeys at New York University in April 1988, and those at a rally of 100 people opposed to animal experimentation at the University of California, also in April 1988. Some of the surveys were completed at the protest; others were distributed and returned by mail later to the researchers. At each of the three protests about one-third of the demonstrators completed the questionnaire. The activities at the three protests were similar: speeches accompanied by chanting or picketing, followed by a small group of those present offering themselves for arrest by blocking roads or entrances. The duration of the events ranged from one to three hours. Based on the review of the literature, one would hypothesize that preexisting social networks are the most significant factor that leads new members to join together for a particular social cause. Beginning with Karl Marx, who outlined the necessary conditions for the proletariat to revolt, numerous social scientists have pointed out that the physical concentration or gathering of those with a common grievance is a prerequisite for social action. Thus, it is hypothesized that previous personal contact with someone in the movement is the most important factor in explaining a person’s involvement. Prior activism or the value of political activity helps to make this contact more likely and increase the tendency to affiliate with a social protest activity. Jasper and Poulsen asked the protesters to estimate the importance of personal networks in recruitment activities. They found that the relative importance of social networks differed between the two groups. Very Important Somewhat Important Not Important Anti-nuclear sample 51% 29% 19% Animal rights sample 31% 22% 47% The hypothesis appears to be confirmed with the demonstrators against nuclear power but less so with animal rights activists. This latter group seemed to be motivated more by “specific events” that had caused them to act and to come to the protests even without friends. Among those in the animal rights sample, 72 percent had found “things they read” to be “very important.” For example, one animal rights protester said, “I remember my first photos of cats being tortured in experiments; it was at a table on Fifth Avenue in 1987. I didn’t know anybody in the movement—in fact I thought they were a bunch of weirdos. But they were right about animal torture.” (p. 501) Although they sampled a third of the participants of each of three relatively large protests, the authors acknowledge that a single group of protestors cannot fully represent an entire movement. So they went beyond their questionnaires, conducted interviews with people active in the movement, and did content analysis of movement publications and leaflets. This all served to confirm that the network hypothesis held true for anti-nuclear power but not for animal rights activists, who seemed more affected by experiences or information they had come by personally. Both movements emphasize a human relationship with the environment and view technology as being out of control, but the anti-nuclear power mobilization effort depended more on personal networks. While the presence of nuclear power is obvious—there are the familiar cooling towers and the occasional story (fictional and nonfictional alike) of a nuclear “disaster”—the symbols are not nearly as familiar to people as animals are. Eighty percent of the animal protesters had pets, compared with 61 percent of all U.S. households. Comparisons to their animal friends were obvious, as one New Jersey activist recalls: “But I went by a table one day and saw these terrifying pictures. That’s what goes on inside our country’s best, most scientific labs? There was a tabby [cat] that looked just like mine, but instead of a skull it has some kind of electrodes planted in its head. I thought about that a little bit, right there on the street, and I brought home all their literature. I decided, that’s gotta stop.” (p. 506) What Jasper terms these “moral shocks” are what first recruit strangers into some types of social movements such as animal rights. He and Poulsen help us to better understand the many factors that are involved in social movement mobilization, which is a more complex process than one of friends recruiting friends. Sources: James M. Jasper. The Art of Moral Protest: Cultural Dimensions of Social Movements. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997; M. Jasper and Jane Poulsen, “Recruiting Strangers and Friends: Moral Shocks and Social Networks in Animal Rights and Anti-Nuclear Protests,” Social Problems 42 (November 1995): 493–512; David A. Snow, Louis A. Zurcher, Jr., and Sheldon Ekland-Olson, “Social Networks and Social Movements: A Microstructural Approach to Differential Recruitment,” American Sociological Review 45 (1980): 787–801. 21-5: The Social Movement for Prostitutes’ Rights In the view of its supporters, prostitution is a service industry, and prostitutes are professional sex workers. However, prostitution is illegal in most of the United States and around the world. Prostitutes are often arrested, though their clients generally are not. Given the common stigma attached to prostitution, it is no easy task to work for the rights of prostitutes. COYOTE (an acronym for “Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics”) was the first and remains the best-known of the prostitutes’ rights organizations in the United States. Established in 1973, COYOTE has grown into a national organization based in San Francisco, with branches and affiliates in at least 12 major cities in the United States and ties to similar organizations overseas. COYOTE and its allies advocate the repeal of all existing laws against prostitution, the reconstitution of prostitution as a credible service organization, and the legal protection of prostitutes as legitimate service workers. Activists in COYOTE view prostitution as a victimless crime and therefore favor full decriminalization of such consensual sexual activity. They flatly oppose legalization of prostitution, whether in the form of registration and licensing, special taxes, compulsory health examinations, or “red light districts.” COYOTE believes that any such regulations will inevitably perpetuate the stigma attached to prostitution while unfairly regulating what women do with their bodies. Sociologist Valerie Jenness suggests that COYOTE has had many successes. Among these are (1) holding conferences and leading demonstrations to raise public awareness concerning the rights of prostitutes, (2) persuading public defenders to assist women charged with prostitution, (3) pressuring government agencies to establish free health clinics for prostitutes, (4) building coalitions in support of prostitutes’ rights with certain feminist organizations, and (5) serving as a crucial link between sex workers and public health agencies as the AIDS crisis has intensified. By contrast, sociologist Ronald Weitzer points to the failures of the prostitutes’ rights movement. In his view, COYOTE and other activist groups have failed to shift public opinion (which remains hostile to prostitutes’ rights), there have been few significant legislative concessions, and movement leaders are rarely consulted by policymakers. Weitzer contends that the movement’s resource-mobilization efforts have been largely unsuccessful: The limited resources of activist organizations have not been supplemented by meaningful alliances with other social movements or more established interest groups. Nevertheless, Weitzer acknowledges that the prostitutes’ rights movement has enhanced the self-images of activists, while assisting individual prostitutes, attracting media attention, and winning certain legal battles. It is not easy to assess the success or failure of a social movement; indeed, sociologists do not agree about the criteria that should be utilized. In one study, sociologist William Gamson traced the activities of a representative sample of 53 social movements that emerged in the United States between 1800 and 1945. Gamson measured the relative success or failure of these movements by examining whether or not they gained new advantages and gained acceptance from their antagonists. He found that 31 of the social movements studied (58 percent) gained either new advantages or acceptance, while another 20 movements (38 percent) gained both. Judged against Gamson’s criteria, the prostitutes’ rights movement would thus far appear to be a movement (like 4 percent of those studies) that has not genuinely gained either new advantages or acceptance. Nevertheless, despite formal norms against prostitution and negative public opinion, the prostitutes’ rights movement has not disappeared, and it continues to work for what it sees as social justice. Sources: William A. Gamson. The Strategy of Social Protest (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1990; Valerie Jenness, “Can COYOTE Guard the Chicken Coop?” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for the Study of Social Problems, Cincinnati, 1991; Jenness, “In Search of Legitimacy: Prostitutes’ Rights Organizations and Contemporary Feminism.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Pacific Sociological Association, Spokane, WA, 1992; Jenness. Making It Work: The Prostitutes’ Rights Movement in Perspective. New York: Aldine De Gruyter, 1993; Ronald Weitzer, “Prostitutes’ Rights in the United States: The Failure of a Movement,” Sociological Quarterly 32 (1)(1993): 23–41. CLASSROOM DISCUSSION TOPICS 21-1. Stimulating Classroom Discussions about Smart Mobs: Among questions for stimulating a classroom discussion about Howard Rheingold’s Smart Mobs could be the following: Would you or your friends likely mobilize to action as presented by Rheingold? Why or why not? What is it about technology that makes it possible for people to collectivize to the point of overthrowing a political force? How has technology created the “Dixie Chick” syndrome for some people? Could it just be a fad or craze? Why do you think people in Europe were able to collectively oppose the 2003 Iraq war in greater numbers than those in the United States were? Do you think technology had an impact on their collectivizing to oppose the war? 21-2. Collective Behavior and the Arrival of a Monster: The alleged sighting of a monster in a small Illinois town offers the opportunity to test a theory of collective behavior. See David L. Miller, Kenneth J. Mietus, Richard J. Mietus, and Richard A. Mathers, “A Critical Examination of the Social Contagion Image of Collective Behavior: The Case of the Enfield Monster,” Sociological Quarterly 19 (Winter 1978): 129–130, 132–140. 21-3. Participation in Collective Behavior – Improv Everywhere: Show selected video clips such as The MP3 Experiment Tour, Frozen Grand Central Station, The Human Mirror, etc., from Improv Everywhere’s YouTube video postings. Ask the class to classify Improv Everywhere’s behavior. Discuss motivations for this type of collective behavior. How does the Improv Everywhere website explain these behaviors? Would the rest of society agree? Expand the discussion to examine the integral role technology plays in recruitment, organization, and even the tools used for Improv Everywhere’s “missions”: www.youtube.com/user/ImprovEverywhere; improveverywhere.com. 21-4. Fads and Fashions: With minimal direction, ask the students to compile individual lists of current fads and fashions. Combine these into a larger list and have the class evaluate the responses. 21-5. Rumors, A Class Activity: Divide the class into a couple of groups, and play the game “rumor.” Many of the students will have played this game as children. Give one person in the group a piece of paper with something simple written on it; have that person whisper what is written on the paper to the person sitting next to him or her; that person does the same with the person on the other side, and so on. Have the last person to hear the rumor write it down. Compare what the last person “heard” to what the first person actually said. This is a fun activity that can lead to a discussion of how easily things become distorted. You can then turn the discussion to rumors that the students heard on 9/11 and rumors they have heard about terrorist attacks since that time. 21-6. Social Movement Speaker: Invite a spokesperson for a local chapter of a national social movement, such as an officer of the National Organization for Women or People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Have the representative describe the social history of the movement. 21-7. Student Social Movements in Beijing: Studies of student social movements focus on U.S. college campuses, but students are at the core of social movement participants globally. See Dingxin Zhao, “Ecologies of Social Movements: Student Mobilization during the 1989 Prodemocracy Movement in Beijing,” American Journal of Sociology 103 (May 1998): 93–99. 21-8. Social Movement Organizations: See Technique No. 2 in Edward L. Kain and Robin Neas (eds.). Innovative Techniques for Teaching Sociological Concepts. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 1993. 21-9. Participation in Collective Behavior: Ask students to discuss situations in which they found themselves participating in one of the major forms of collective behavior listed in the text. How did they interpret their actions at the time? How do they interpret them now? TOPICS FOR STUDENT RESEARCH AND CLASSROOM DISCUSSION 1. Ask students to locate evidence of collective activities that are either encouraging or discouraging efforts by United States to halt terrorism, and discuss the approaches used in developing social movements. 2. Ask students to research the Internet for websites that are intended to mobilize individuals regarding certain behaviors or activities, and discuss the connection between technology and collective behavior. 3. Ask students to identify any organizational or corporate sponsored media information that is designed to dissuade the viewer from the traditional view on a particular issue, and discuss society resistance to social movements. 4. Ask students to search for evidence of social groups developing an emergent norm regarding the 2003 Iraq war, and discuss the emergent norm perspective. 5. Ask students to research how rumors of bioterrorism might create massive social movements, and discuss Neil Smelser’s elements of the value-added model that leads to collective behavior. CHAPTER 22 SOCIAL CHANGE IN THE GLOBAL COMMUNITY CHAPTER OUTLINE THEORIES OF SOCIAL CHANGE Evolutionary Theory Functionalist Theory Conflict Theory RESISTANCE TO SOCIAL CHANGE Economic and Cultural Factors Resistance to Technology GLOBAL SOCIAL CHANGE TECHNOLOGY AND THE FUTURE Computer Technology Privacy and Censorship in a Global Village Biotechnology and the Gene Pool SOCIAL POLICY AND GLOBALIZATION: TRANSNATIONALS Boxes Trend Spotting: Longer Life Spans, More Social Change Case Study: Social Change in Dubai Sociology in the Global Community: One Laptop Per Child Research Today: The Internet’s Global Profile Research Today: The Human Genome Project LEARNING OBJECTIVES WHAT’S NEW IN CHAPTER 22 1. Discuss the evolutionary theory of social change. 2. Discuss the processes involved in Talcott Parson’s equilibrium model of social change. 3. Discuss how the conflict theory of social change differs from evolutionary theory. 4. Describe the influence of various factors that create resistance to social change. 5. Discuss the global nature of social change. 6. Discuss the issues relating to privacy and censorship in a global village. 7. Describe the issues surrounding advances in biotechnology and genetic engineering. 8. Discuss issues surrounding the increase in transnational immigrants. • Chapter-opening excerpt from I Live in the Future and Here’s How it Works: Why Your World, Work, and Brain Are Being Creatively Disrupted, by Nick Bilton • Discussion of the vested interests that opposed cancellation of NASA’s Constellation project • Trend Spotting Box, “Longer Life Spans, More Social Change” • Case Study, “Social Change in Dubai” • Discussion of the use of cell phones to improve agriculture in developing countries • Discussion of the role of migrants in facilitating global trade and development in Social Policy section CHAPTER SUMMARY Social change has been defined as significant alteration over time in behavior patterns and culture, including norms and values. Theorists have examined social change from several disciplines and perspectives, including evolutionary theory, functionalist theory, and conflict theory. Evolutionary theory views society as moving in a definite direction. Early evolutionary theorists generally agreed that society was inevitably progressing to a higher state. Auguste Comte was an evolutionary theorist of change. He saw human societies as moving forward in their thinking from mythology to the scientific method. Émile Durkheim maintained that society progressed from simple to more complex forms of social organization. Talcott Parsons, a leading proponent of functionalist theory, viewed society as being in a natural state of equilibrium. According to his equilibrium model, as changes occur in one part of society, adjustments must be made in other parts. The dominant theme of Parsons’s theory is balance and stability. Conflict theorists suggest that social institutions and practices continue because powerful groups have the ability to maintain the status quo. Change has crucial significance because it is needed to correct social injustices and inequalities. Karl Marx argues that conflict is normal and a desirable aspect of social change. Efforts to promote social change are likely to meet with resistance. Social economist Thorstein Veblen coined the term vested interests to refer to those people or groups who will suffer in the event of social change. In general, those with a disproportionate share of society’s wealth, status, and power have a vested interest in preserving the status quo and resisting social change. Communities also protect their vested interests, often in the name of “protecting property values” (e.g., NIMBY). In addition to economic factors, cultural factors often shape resistance to change. The term cultural lag refers to the period of maladjustment during which the nonmaterial culture is still adapting to new material conditions. Technological innovations are examples of changes in material culture that have often provoked resistance to social change. The Luddites strongly resisted the industrial revolution in England in the early nineteenth century. Today, the term neo-Luddites refers to those who are wary of technological innovations and who question the incessant expansion of industrialization, the increasing destruction of the natural and agrarian world, and the “throw-it-away” mentality of contemporary capitalism. We live in an era of dramatic social, political, and economic change on a global scale, witnessing terrorism, AIDS, genetic engineering, regime changes, economic disruptions, and the computer revolution. New technologies like the computer and the Internet have brought about sweeping social change. While much of that change has been beneficial, there have been negative effects as well. The issues of privacy and censorship in a global village are significant. These issues demonstrate culture lag: The technology has been changing faster than society’s norms for controlling its use. Computer technology has made it increasingly easy for businesses, government agencies, and even criminals to access and store sensitive information about individuals. While functionalists point to the manifest function of the Internet to facilitate communication, conflict theorists contend that powerful groups use technological advances to maintain and invade the privacy of the less powerful. Another area in which technological advances have spurred global social change is biotechnology. The Human Genome Project; genetically engineered organisms, including genetically modified food (“frankenfood”); cloning; and sex selection of fetuses are significant, yet controversial, scientific advances. While biotechnology offers great potential for good, it is in constant need of monitoring, and raises difficult ethical, moral, and political questions. Biotechnology could alter our environment in unexpected and unwanted ways. RESOURCE INTEGRATOR Focus Questions Resources 1. How do functionalists and conflict theorists view social change? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: social change, evolutionary theory, equilibrium model Visual Support: Table 22-1, “The United States: A Changing Nation”; Photo of Buenos Aires shantytown; Table 22-2, “Sociological Perspectives on Social Change” IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 22-1, 22-2, 22-3, 22-4 Classroom Discussion Topics: 22-1, 22-2, 22-3, 22-4 Topics and Sources for Student Research: Social Change Theory; Social Change—A Classic Look Video Resources: Social Change REEL SOCIETY CD Topic Index: Social Change 2. How and why do people resist social change? IN THE TEXT Key Terms: vested interests, culture lag, technology, Luddites Box: Trend Spotting, “Longer Life Spans, More Social Change” Case Study: Social Change in Dubai Visual Support: Photo of Google street car in England; photo of GPS device IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 22-2, 22-4, 22-5, 22-6 Classroom Discussion Topics: 22-2, 22-3, 22-4, 22-6 Topics and Sources for Student Research: Social Change Theory; Social Change—A Classic Look Video Resources: Social Change 3. What are the key issues concerning technology, computers, privacy, and censorship? IN THE TEXT Box: Research Today, “The Internet’s Global Profile Visual Support: Photo of “face robot”; Cartoon about text messaging; Photo of surveillance cameras IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 22-7, 22-8 Classroom Discussion Topics: 22-1, 22-4, 22-5, 22-6, 22-7, 22-8 Topics and Sources for Student Research: Diffusion of Technology; DNA; Scientific Change; Surgery and Virtual Reality Video Resources: The Internet: Portal to Everywhere; Is Cloning Ethical; What Ever Happened to Privacy? 4. What are the key issues concerning biotechnology and genetic engineering? IN THE TEXT Boxes: Research Today, “The Human Genome Project” Visual Support: Photo of Ugandan farmer IN THE INSTRUCTOR’S MANUAL Additional Lecture Ideas: 22-8 Classroom Discussion Topics: 22-4 Video Resources: Bioterror; Deconstructing Supper; The Internet; Is Cloning Ethical? LECTURE OUTLINE Introduction: Social change is defined as significant alteration over time in behavior patterns and culture. I. Theories of Social Change A. Evolutionary Theory • Darwin’s theory contributed to evolutionary theory of social change, which views society as moving in a definite direction. • Auguste Comte saw human societies moving forward in their thinking from mythology to scientific method. • Durkheim contended society progressed from simple to more complex forms. • Today, evolutionary theory’s influence is seen in sociobiologists’ study of behavioral links between humans and other animals. B. Functionalist Theory • Talcott Parsons viewed society as being in a state of equilibrium. • The equilibrium model suggests that as changes occur in one part of society, there must be adjustments in other parts. • Parsons maintained four processes of social change are inevitable: differentiation (increasing complexity of social organization); adaptive upgrading (social institutions become more specialized); inclusion (of groups previously excluded because of their gender, race, ethnicity, and social class); and value generalization (development of new values tolerating and legitimating a greater range of activities). All four stress consensus. • His model emphasizes balance and stability. • Functionalists contend that drastic alteration of social institutions will threaten societal equilibrium. C. Conflict Theory • Conflict theory contends that social institutions and practices persist because powerful groups have the ability to maintain the status quo. • Change is needed to correct social injustices and inequalities. • The Marxist view of social change is appealing because it does not restrict people to a passive role in responding to inevitable cycles or changes in material culture. Marx saw conflict as a normal and desirable aspect of social change. • Dahrendorf found that the functionalist and conflict approaches were compatible in many areas of explaining social change. II. Resistance to Social Change • Vested interests: those people or groups who will suffer in the event of social change. Example: American Medical Association against national health insurance. A. Economic and Cultural Factors • High costs of meeting standards (e.g., safety, environmental) can lead to resistance by businesses. They may cut corners or pressure government to ease regulations. • NIMBY (not in my backyard) is a common attitude among communities. • William F. Ogburn introduced the term culture lag to refer to a period of maladjustment during which the nonmaterial culture is still adapting to new material conditions. Example: the Internet. B. Resistance to Technology • Technological innovations are examples of changes in material culture • Luddites resisted the industrial revolution in England beginning in 1811. • French workers threw sabots (wooden shoes) to destroy factory machinery [thus the term sabotage]. • Neo-Luddites: those who are wary of technological innovations and who question the incessant expansion of industrialization, the increasing destruction of the natural and agrarian world, and the disposable mentality of contemporary capitalization. III. Global Social Change • Dramatic global social change. Examples: terrorism, cloning, AIDS, major regime changes, economic disruptions, and the computer revolution. • Randall Collins predicted the collapse of the Soviet Union as early as 1980. • Some have looked to the “chaos theory” advanced by mathematicians to understand erratic events as a part of change. IV. Technology and the Future A. Computer Technology • We are in an era of rapid growth and change in computer technology. Example: Internet reached 1.6 billion users in 2009 compared to 50 million in 1996. • Global problem of unequal distribution of access to technology and the information, education, commerce tied to it. Box: One Laptop Per Child. B. Privacy and Censorship in a Global Village • Computer technology has made it increasingly easy for businesses, government agencies, and even criminals to access and store sensitive information about us. • The issues of privacy and censorship demonstrate culture lag. • Legislation hasn’t always upheld citizens’ right to privacy. Example: USA Patriot Act. • Functionalists point to the manifest function of the Internet to facilitate communication. • Conflict theorists contend that powerful groups use technological advances to maintain their position and invade the privacy of the less powerful. C. Biotechnology and the Gene Pool • Advances in biotechnology have provoked controversy. Examples: sex selection of fetuses, genetically engineered organisms, cloning. • Some see biotechnology as an extension of the medicalization of society. • While advances can be beneficial, vigilant monitoring is needed. 1. Genetic Engineering • Alteration of plant, animal, and human life through gene therapy. • Controversy surrounding genetically modified foods is spreading. Example: “Frankenfood.” • Human Genome Project: Teams of scientists around the world sequencing/mapping all human genes. Huge potential to prevent and treat disease, but sociologists worry about ethical implications. V. Social Policy and Social Change: Transnationals A. The Issue • Globalization and the emergence of transnationals: immigrants who sustain multiple social relationships that link their societies of origin with their societies of settlement. B. The Setting • Globalization has unified what were once discrete labor markets. • The Internet gives transnationals immediate access to their countries and kinfold. • In poor countries, the volume of remittances sent home by immigrants can be significant. C. Sociological Insights • Conflict theorists charge that globalization and international migration have increased the economic gulf between developed and developing nations. • Sociologists who follow world systems analysis suggest that the global flow of people should be factored into the theoretical relationship between core and periphery societies. D. Policy Initiatives • Intense economic competition created by globalization is unraveling the social welfare systems of many countries. • Whether or not transnationals should be allowed to have dual citizenship and/or be able to vote are key policy issues. • The general public’s attitude toward illegal immigrants remains hostile, especially in the United States. KEY TERMS Culture lag A period of maladjustment during which the nonmaterial culture is still adapting to new material conditions. Equilibrium model The functionalist view that society tends toward a state of stability or balance. Evolutionary theory A theory of social change that holds that society is moving in a definite direction. Luddites Rebellious craft workers in nineteenth-century England who destroyed new factory machinery as part of their resistance to the industrial revolution. Social change Significant alteration over time in behavior patterns and culture, including norms and values. Technology Cultural information about how to use the material resources of the environment to satisfy human needs and desires. Transnational An immigrant who sustains multiple social relationships that link his or her society of origin with the society of settlement. Vested interests Those people or groups who will suffer in the event of social change, and who have a stake in maintaining the status quo. ADDITIONAL LECTURE IDEAS 22-1: Steel Axes for Stone-Age Australians Toward the end of the nineteenth century, metal tools began to filter into the territory of the Yir Yoront, a tribe of the Australian Aborigines. Of particular significance to the Yi Yoront was the introduction of the steel ax. While the Aboriginals themselves could not manufacture steel ax heads, a steady supply came from missionaries. Tribal members who attended mission festivals were presented with steel axes, but older members of the Yir Yoront shied away from such gatherings because of their earlier experience or knowledge of White people’s harshness. Therefore, women and younger men were more likely to own a steel ax. Ownership of a steel ax emerged as a measure of status. This was especially significant because the stone ax had generally been possessed by elder males and thus was a symbol of authority. Other tribal members would have to come to an elder if they wanted to use a stone ax, but the possession of the superior steel axes by women and younger men changed all that. A wife or a young son, still uninitiated into adulthood, no longer needed to bow to the husband or father. Instead, the elder, confused and insecure, might have to borrow a steel ax from them. For the woman and boy, the steel ax helped establish a new degree of freedom that was readily accepted as they moved away from traditional values. Also, women, by virtue of ownership of this artifact of outside culture, had a trading power denied to older men. By the mid-1930s, the Yir Yoront had maintained some of their Aboriginal identity amidst the increasing acceptance of European inventions and values, but the general passing of their culture led Lauristan Sharp to conclude that the Yir Yoront “has passed beyond the reach of any outsider who might wish to do him well or ill . . .” See L. Sharp, “Steel Axes for Stone-Age Australians.” In Technological Change. New York: Russell Sage, 1952, pp. 69–90. 22-2: Changes in the Family: A Functionalist View In 1934 sociologist William F. Ogburn prepared a report for a Presidential Research Committee on Social Trends that dealt with the effects of social change on the functions of the family. Ogburn argued that the family has been altered by the process of differentiation identified by Parsons as an inevitable aspect of social change. Specifically, Ogburn discussed these functions of the family: 1. In colonial times, the family carried out its economic function entirely within the household. But in the twentieth century, while some Americans still bake their own bread or sew their own clothing, very few make their own soap or furniture, and family members no longer have to rely only on each other for economic security. 2. The family’s protective function has been turned over to outside agencies such as hospitals, mental health clinics, and insurance companies. 3. The family once played a major role in religious life. For example, it commonly read the Bible and sang hymns at home. Today, churches, synagogues, and other formal institutions of religion have assumed this function. 4. Similarly, whereas education once took place at the family fireside, it is now the responsibility of professionals working in schools and colleges. 5. Even the family’s recreational function has been transferred to outside groups such as youth organizations, athletic clubs, and community-sponsored recreation halls. The adaptive upgrading noted by Parsons is evident as the family’s responsibilities are shifted to religious schools, daycare centers, and even video arcades. 6. Ogburn identified a sixth function of the family, the conferring status, which has also been diluted in the twentieth century. In the past, membership in a particular family largely defined one’s status in a community and significantly influenced whom one would marry, where one would live, and what occupation one would pursue. Currently, because of geographical and social mobility, the family plays a much smaller role in determining one’s status and future within society. 7. Ogburn pointed to the status of the “family defunctionalization,” the loss of functions of the family unit, as a factor contributing to marital unhappiness and divorce. But he stressed that the family retains responsibility for the function of providing affection. It offers warm, intimate interactions that contribute to individual satisfaction and societal stability. By giving companionship and emotional support to its members, the family reduces social isolation and serves the interests of the larger society. See Ogburn and Clark Tibbits, “The Family and Its Functions.” In Recent Trends in the United States. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1934, pp. 661–778. 22-3: Assessing Social Change through Reality TV Although we all know that social life has changed a great deal during the past 150 years, being able to grasp the enormity of those changes can be a challenge. Historical documentaries can be one useful tool for trying to understand how much our lives have changed in a relatively short period. The problem, though, is that the people we see in documentaries have never known any other world. How can we know how much the social world has changed since they lived, if the “old” life seems so normal to them? Recently, several TV series have sidestepped this issue by plucking people from the modern-day world, and asking them to live as they would have a hundred or more years ago. In Manor House, about two dozen contemporary Brits live for three months in a wealthy English country home, refurbished and equipped to look as it would have in 1905. Each of the participants fills one of the social statuses that would have been common in such a home: the master of the house and his family “upstairs,” and an array of servants—each with very strictly defined roles and privileges—”downstairs.” In 1900 House, a British family, the Bowlers, spend three months living in a London house restored to the conditions and technology that would have been available to a middle-class family at the turn of the twentieth century. In Frontier House, three American families—the Clunes, the Brookses, and the Glenns—spend five months in Montana living as nineteenth-century pioneer homesteaders would have lived. These “reality TV” shows take as their premise the idea that Western societies have changed so much in the past century that twenty-first-century people would have a rough time adjusting to life in the past. In Manor House, a key expectation is that the very strict social hierarchy in a wealthy Edwardian home, along with the long, backbreaking work days expected of servants of the period, would be a difficult challenge for modern-day people. Indeed, it is amazing to see how quickly tensions and animosities form at Manor House, most of them reflecting differences in privileges and work loads among people in the household hierarchy. Many of the servants, for example, form a strong animosity toward the master of the house, John Olliff-Cooper. Among other reasons, he is resented for the fact that he is so oblivious to the backbreaking labor that his servants must undertake in order to make his life comfortable. Edwardian social expectations are often the source of such tensions. In Mr. Olliff-Cooper’s case, dictates of the time required that his interaction with the servants be very limited, leaving him unaware of most of their daily activities. Another very interesting clash of historical role expectations develops around Avril Anson, the sister of Mr. Olliff-Cooper’s wife. An unmarried, independent, professionally accomplished woman in the twenty-first century, she finds herself something of a social anomaly in the Edwardian world. Despite being in her fifties, her status as a single woman in an Edwardian home means that her autonomy is severely restricted. Essentially, her days are scheduled according to the needs of Mr. Olliff-Cooper and his wife, and she is unable to pursue her own interests without their permission. As the show proceeds, it becomes increasingly apparent that such a restricted social position is wearing on her nerves. At one point, she expresses frustration that she is not even allowed to take issue with any of Mr. Olliff-Cooper’s mealtime commentaries. In the end, she becomes so overwhelmed that she must leave the show for some time during the course of its taping. By contrast, Frontier House and 1900 House explore the tribulations of modern-day people as they adjust to technology from an earlier era. Apart from demonstrating that daily life was much more physically demanding in the past, these shows also do an excellent job of showing how technology can influence our social relationships, beliefs, and social roles. On 1900 House, Mrs. Bowler is immediately overwhelmed by the amount of housework expected of a middle-class turn-of-the-century woman. The first time that she takes on the family laundry pile, for example, the task takes the entire day to complete, and she must keep two of her daughters home from school to enlist their help. As a result, she becomes increasingly resentful of her husband, who is allowed to leave the drudgery of household chores every morning to go to work. By the end of the series, she has become very interested in early feminist movements. On Frontier House, living the difficult lives of homesteaders has a strong impact on the quality of family relationships. For Mark and Karen Glenn, hard work and lack of sleep create new tensions in their marriage, and after leaving Montana, they decide to separate. For the Clunes, on the other hand, frontier life brings a new family closeness. One senses that this wealthy California family spends little time together in the modern world. Once wrested away from busy jobs, shopping, and teenage peer groups, they come to know and appreciate one another in a new way. Additional reading ideas: Anita Gates, “And You Complain About Long Hours?” New York Times, (April 27, 2003); Marc Peyser, “Television: Prairie Home Companions,” Newsweek, (April 29, 2002); Marilyn Stasio, “Getting Back to Basics. It Isn’t Pretty,” New York Times, (April 28, 2002). 22-4: Resisting Social Change In 1994, Saudi Arabia took steps to ban satellite television dishes as part of efforts to defend its religious and social mores. A cabinet decree, carried by the Saudi Press Agency, banned the use, import, or manufacture of satellite dishes, microwaves, or any parts of either one in Saudi Arabia. The decree also said that “no person or company” has the right to deliver television satellite feeds to subscribers in the kingdom by any means. Violators would pay fines of between $26,666 and $133,333, and equipment would be confiscated. “The Ministry of Information will carry the responsibility of reception of external television broadcasts by international satellite stations and will deliver viewers in the Kingdom by a cable system according to the religious and social mores of the country,” the decree said. In recent years, the use of satellite dishes has spread in the conservative kingdom. Viewers are eager to see the Saudi-owned Arabic-language Middle East Broadcasting Company from London, CNN (Cable News Network) International, and the BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation). It was not immediately clear which services would be rebroadcast by cable. See the Reuters news report in The Daily Citizen 1 (March 11, 1994): 13. 22-5: Amish and Social Change The Amish, numbering 100,000 people in the United States, are usually seen as resistant to social change. Traditionally, the Amish have taken great pains to stay apart from the world at large, not through self-segregation, but by rejecting many elements of twentieth-century life (from radio and air conditioning to movies and jewelry). Nevertheless, the Amish must plan for and control change. Jerry Savells conducted observation research among eight Amish communities during the 1980s. He interviewed not only Amish people but also non-Amish who had regular contact with the Amish as merchants, mail carriers, delivery personnel, and the like. Although isolated, the Amish do not live in a social vacuum. Indeed, they are surrounded by cultural, economic, and political changes and regularly interact with farmers, business leaders, and real estate dealers. Reviewing Savell’s research, we can identify the following areas in which the Amish accommodate social change but maintain the basic character, norms, and values of their distinctive subculture. • Employment. While the Amish seek to be self-supporting within their self-contained farmsteads, this is not always possible. Males sometimes commute to nearby towns or cities to accept employment. Occupations selected (e.g., carpentry or agriculture- related) are not hostile to Amish culture, and transportation is provided by non-Amish drivers. • Redefining boundaries. How should a subculture deal with innovations from the outside world when it is anxious to preserve its own character? How should it draw boundaries regarding what is acceptable? Some Amish people use cosmetics, but only creams; make-up would be considered too “worldly.” Dairy farmers in the Amish community must use diesel power to supply their barns (not their houses) with electricity to meet government standards for proper refrigeration of milk that will be sold commercially. A few have taken this accommodation a bit further: They use generators or bottled gas to operate household appliances (but will not run electrical lines to their dwellings). Because of the hard soil in one area of Oklahoma, some Amish farmers began using tractors. As a result, other members of the Amish community left the area in protest. • Politics. While Amish read and subscribe to newspapers and news magazines, they remain politically uninvolved. (In one election that Savells studied, less than 15 percent of adult males voted.) The Amish believe that, as part of a church, they must remain completely separate from government. The Amish do not view change or technology as inherently evil. But they do see elements of technology, such as the radio or the automobile, as sources of temptation (especially for the young) that can lead to conflict and social disharmony. Nevertheless, the Amish realize that they must make compromises and, in some instances, work within the dominant culture of the United States. As one Amish man remarked, “You cannot put a ship in the middle of the ocean and expect the deck to always stay dry” (Savells, 1990:16). Sources: Jerry Savells, “Social Change among the Amish in Eight Communities,” Pennsylvania Mennonite Heritage 13 (July 1990): 12–16; William M. Kephart and William Zellner. Extraordinary Groups: The Sociology of Unconventional Life-Styles (5th ed.). New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994; “Some Amish to Use Tractors; Those Opposed May Leave Town,” New York Times (April 16, 1995): 20. 22-6: Public Opinion and Nuclear Power Sociologists Eugene A. Rosa and Riley E. Dunlap recently reviewed the trend in public opinion concerning nuclear power over the last 30 years. After the March 1979 accident at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania and then after the April 1986 explosion of the nuclear power plant at Chernobyl in the Ukraine, there was a decided downturn in support of nuclear power. Skeptics said this attitude change would be short-lived. However, the sociologists found that the trends in the longest survey questions showed public opinion to be increasingly unfavorable to nuclear power. Solid majorities of the public oppose the construction of more nuclear power plants and are likewise opposed to siting them locally. This is the NIMBY (not in my backyard) phenomenon. Yet an equally solid majority believe that nuclear power should be and will be an important energy source in the nation’s future. The researchers see this not as a contradiction, but as a pragmatic view on the part of the public to distinguish between nuclear power in principle and practice. Source: Rosa and Dunlap, “Nuclear Power: Three Decades of Public Opinion,” Public Opinion Quarterly 58 (Summer 1994): 295–325. 22-7: Virtual Reality Imagine putting on a helmet and stepping into a suit, complete with gloves and shoes. You are cut off from the real environment around you; through technology, sensations are transmitted to your body so that you feel as if you are swimming in Australia’s Great Barrier Reef or imitating a conversation with Mohammed or Jesus. Virtual reality is an interactive technology that creates an illusion of being immersed in an artificial world or being present in a remote location in the physical world (Rucker et al., 1992:25). Currently, virtual reality is utilized primarily as a form of entertainment. However, a 1992 murder trial used computer simulations to “show” the jury how the defendant allegedly committed the murder. Some observers expect that employers will someday use virtual reality to screen job applicants. Counselors, police officers, and teachers, among others, could be placed in virtual reality to test how well they perform in simulated work situations (Becard, 1993). We are only at the beginning of the possibilities and ethical dilemmas posed by virtual reality. This technological advance could be used to allow a person to indulge norm-defying or even criminal fantasies. Indeed, by the 1990s, computer software was available that allowed users to engage in activities that ridicule or trivialize women and minority groups. See André Bacard, “Technology and Society,” The Humanist 53 (March–April 1993): 42–43; Ruby Rucker, R.V. Sirius, and Queen Ma. Mondo 2000. New York: Harper Perennial, 1992. 22-8: Futurists Futurists are people engaged in an organized study of the future. Futurist Herman Kahn once noted succinctly that in order to understand the future, “we find out what’s really happening and then we try to analyze what that means.” Social predictions can be made, in part, by assessing the social impact of technological and scientific changes. For example, in 1783, passengers traveled by stagecoach at six miles per hour. In 1883, they traveled on steam-powered railway trains at 60 miles per hour. Today, more than 20 million people travel routinely by plane at 600 miles per hour. Physicist and futurist Gerald O’Neill has estimated that in another 100 years, the typical passenger speed will be 6,000 miles per hour. We know that past advances in travel have facilitated cultural diffusion, immigration, political interdependence, and the rise of multinational corporations. It seems clear that further dramatic advances in transportation technology will reshape social relations and alter the major institutions of society. O’Neill believes that the five major sources of change in the twenty-first century will be computers, automation, energy, communications, and space colonies. The present generations of Americans have already been adjusting to rapid changes in the first four of these areas. Social change, whether brought about by technological advances or social movements, is a part of our present and will continue (if not accelerate) in the years ahead. Annually The Futurist publishes trends and forecasts for the United States or the entire world. See Gerald K. O’Neill. 2081: A Hopeful View of the Human Future. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1981. See also Merrill Sheils, “The Cracked Crystal Ball,” Newsweek 94 (November 19, 1979): 133–135. An interesting example of applied futurism is to consider what an emerging culture in a moon colony might be like. Futurists suggest that a large lunar base may be established “in the not-too-distant future.” Once such space colonies may be established, a new type of human culture will inevitably develop. Management psychologist Philip Harris argues that we cannot simply impose one of earth’s cultures in space. The particular demands of life on the moon, for example, will contribute to new lifestyles, new values, and even new religions. In initially adapting to their new environment, settlers on a lunar colony will experience the disorientation, confusion, and anxiety characteristic of culture shock. On the most obvious level, lunar dwellers will face the awesome (and perhaps unsettling) sight of the earth—visible from their new home and yet far, far away. Another severe adjustment will involve day and night; the moon has 14 earth days of light followed by 14 earth days of darkness. The first settlers may find it difficult to cope with “nights” that last for weeks. Indeed, Harris speculates that some will respond with manic behavior similar to that exhibited by Swedes after the annual long periods of darkness in the Scandinavian nation. What of interpersonal relationships on the lunar colony? At first, these relationships are likely to focus around work responsibilities and professional positions, especially since most early settlers will be scientists, technicians, and communications experts. Over time, however, the colonists will have to decide whether to maintain the traditional norms of their native cultures regarding sexuality, family, and the like, or to turn to alternatives. If the lunar residents feel isolated from their homelands on earth, all relationships with other colonists may take on an unusual intensity. Moreover, given the likely importance of robotics on space colonies, human-machine interactions will become more significant than they have ever been on earth. Philip Harris predicts that the settlers may form emotional attachments to their robot helpers, especially as they become more humanlike. Finally, religion may well undergo changes on a lunar base. If the community has members from all over the earth, there are likely to be Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and adherents to other faiths thrown together in a demanding situation in which cooperative norms are essential. This may lead to a respectful religious pluralism, to evangelical efforts to convert settlers to one’s faith, or to the emergence of a new religion—a “cosmic consciousness” that draws on all the current religions on earth and integrates them into a belief system focused on the universe rather than on a single planet. No one knows, of course, what directions life on a space colony may take. But futurists and planners must consider these questions now, drawing on the expertise of sociologists, psychologists, and other social scientists, so that some of the difficulties of space culture can be addressed before they arise. See Philip R. Harris, “Living on the Moon: Will Humans Develop an Unearthly Culture?” The Futurist 19 (April 1985): 30–33, 35. CLASSROOM DISCUSSION TOPICS 22-1. Ruling the Waves: Cycles of Discovery, Chaos, and Wealth from the Compass to the Internet: Stimulating classroom discussions about Ruling the Waves: Cycles of Discovery, Chaos, and Wealth from the Compass to the Internet could include: Do students download music from the Internet? Do they see this activity as a form of piracy? Should the power completely shift to the artist? Examine the notion of putting music online from the functionalist and conflict perspectives. How could we examine this phenomenon from a microlevel perspective? In what other ways has the Internet led to social change in our everyday lives? 22-2. Colleges and Social Change: What will universities be like in the year 2000? Although we now know the answer to this question, it is interesting to see what people in the past thought, and how accurate or inaccurate their predictions were. See Malcolm G. Scully, “Colleges to Be More Alike by the Year 2000, Researcher Says,” Chronicle of Higher Education 27 (October 5, 1983): 1, 14–15. 22-3. Modern Industrial Society—A Recent Development: See Technique No. 25 in Edward L. Kain and Robin Neas (eds.). Innovative Techniques for Teaching Sociological Concepts. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 1993. 22-4. The Next Hundred Years: For a series of futuristic articles on topics that include social class, life cycles, technology and childbirth, folkways, race and ethnicity, and gender, see The New York Times Magazine, September 29, 1996. 22-5. Telecommuting: Would students consider a job after graduation that cast them in the role of a telecommuter? Would this be a drawback or a plus as an aspect of potential employment? 22-6. Norms and New Developments: How do we go about trying to establish rules for areas that represent unknowns in society at present? See Technique No. 16 in Edward L. Kain and Robin Neas (eds.). Innovative Techniques for Teaching Sociological Concepts. Washington, DC: American Sociological Association, 1993. 22-7. Inequality: Review how technology may perpetuate social inequality between rich and poor, men and women, and core and peripheral countries. 22-8. Identity Theft in Cyberspace: Identity theft has been called the “crime of the new millennium,” and is considered the fastest growing financial crime in the United States. Invite a special agent from the FBI to come to class to discuss this crime. Also encourage students to read the article on identity theft in Time, July 2, 2001, p. 44. TOPICS FOR STUDENT RESEARCH AND CLASSROOM DISCUSSION 1. Ask students to discuss whether they believe that changes in communication technology have made people more likely to move to distant states or countries. If yes, list the technologies that enable people to move, and explain why. If no, explain why these technologies are not sufficient. 2. Ask students to research how the apparent U.S. foreign policy of “preemption” could create massive social change in defense strategies and policies, and discuss resistance to technology. 3. Ask students to search the Internet for websites that are intended to protest certain behaviors or activities, and discuss the connection between technology and social change. 4. Ask students to research a controversial building project within their community that segregated portions of the community by maintaining their vested interests, and discuss economic and cultural factors associated with resistance to social change. Instructor Manual for Sociology Richard T. Schaefer 9780078026669