1. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
The sociological perspective focuses not on the now, but the past and future also. In our
sociology book, the author made the definition quite simple. He quoted, “I was determined; I will
experience what they experience. ” He wrote this after spending some time at a homeless shelter,
trying to live the way that they do. He ate the “food” that he described as a “bowl of semi liquid that I
couldn’t identify.” The author went through the every day life of a homeless person, even though he
had clean sheets and tasty food at his own home. He wanted to understand what makes these
people feel the way that they do (Henslin, The Sociological Perspective, 2015).
To achieve a formal perspective, you must ask yourself: how do these contexts influence their
lives, and how are they influenced by their society? After reading the text, the thought of not having
a home in general brings tears to my eyes. I cannot imagine the cold nights, sitting on the dewy-
ground, with the only thing on your mind being a fireplace. Then to top it off, the shelter that you call
home can only provide the bare-minimum for survival. This “survival kit” includes dirty Styrofoam
cups full of food that a dog might not eat.
This makes me reflect on my own life. I, as many, complain about trivial things. I complain
about when it's too cold, when it's too hot, and when my favorite show didn't record on my DVR.
After reading the article, I can honestly say, “I am a spoiled American.”
I say this, because complaining about trivial things is a symbol of Americans. We take what we
have for granted and try to donate to causes that we may even be to blame for. Without symbolic
interaction-ism, us humans would merely go through every-day life, simply surviving like animals. Our
symbols attach meaning, and with this meaning comes communication with one another. Symbols
even include family members. Without the title, your brother is just be another human. Families

2. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
ideals may not exist, and you would not know who to pay your respects to, or how to act around
certain people.
Marriage is another strong symbol. Fifty years ago, marriage was a life long commitment.
Through sickness and in health, maybe infidelity and abuse, you stayed with the person that you
signed your life away to. Divorce was frowned upon, even considered immoral. This is now a common
act. “Rather than being a symbol of failure, divorce came to indicate freedom and new beginnings.
Removing the stigma from divorce shattered a strong barrier that had prevented
husbands and wives from breaking up” (Henslin, The Sociological Perspective, 2015).
I may not go to the same measures to understand other social groups as the author did at the
homeless shelter, but I try to keep an open mind. For example, I observe the behaviors of the people
around me, whether it is between friends or acquaintances. I've noticed that there are very intense
gender specific characteristics. I personally have way more male friends than female, not because of
their gender, but for the fact that I have similar topics of conversation and interests as them. I've
noticed that females tend to be infatuated with themselves or every attractive male that is within five
feet of them. Instead of talking about their favorite hobbies or influential people in their lives, they
make their hobbies to talk about other people. It all seems to be conflict oriented to me. In contrast,
males tend to conversate about world events, sports, and topics that do not revolve around malicious
gossip.
These gender specific characteristics that I am referring to is what most would call a
stereotype- “oversimplified conceptions that people who occupy the same status group share certain
traits in common” (Henslin, The Sociology of Gender, 2015).

3. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
I am aware that not all females are full of drama, but that's the beauty of stereotyping. They
can be positive or negative. Some believe that women make up for gender discrimination by
occupying their time talking about people and being dramatic.
Men often discriminate against women, looking at them like they are inferior, and it is
statistically proven in that “female full-time workers made only 78 cents for every dollar earned by
men, a gender wage gap of 22 percent” ("Pay Equity & Discrimination", 2010). I'm not quite sure why
women tend to make less money than men. For all the progression made by women in the past fifty
years, I don't see how sexism and gender discrimination still exists today. It was only in 1920 when
women could begin to vote. That held us at a lower standard of status than men. But women fought
and fought, to now make less than men. Since 1971, women's participation in the labor force has
grown from 32 million (43.4% of the female population 16 and over) to 68 million (59.2% of the
female population 16 and over) ("Gender - Boundless Open Textbook", 2014). I've seen plenty of
harder working women than men. Your pay stubs should not be defined by your gender.
Nowadays, conflict theorists agree with Engels, Kyle Marx's collaborator, by suggesting that
when women “gain economic strength by also being wage earners, their power inside the home is
strengthened and can lead to more egalitarian arrangements.” Household responsibilities rely on key
factors, such as the bread-winner's occupational location and work experience. If the male of the
household makes the higher pay, the undesirable work will be performed by the woman. She may
hold the lower paying part-time job, and perform house-hold duties to not burden the family's status.
In turn, the woman may be doing more work than the man, because when she gets off work, she has
to “work” in the house, doing dishes, laundry, cooking, etc.

4. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
In the past, this was a definite gender specific role. Today, it is almost just as common for the
woman of the house to work while the male spends his time at home taking care of the children and
cleaning. Some men look at the man who is the “house wife” and think that he is unmanly for not
making the money. I personally believe that gender shouldn't have anything to do with the roles in a
relationship.
I used to look up to the women that could handle a part-time job and take care of children and
household chores. Today, I feel more independent. I look up to the women that have high-end jobs
and don't feel the need to bear children. I also don't feel the need to have a traditional marriage. I'm
independent and confident in myself and my relationship, that I don't feel the need to even get
married. My views are, is that it's just a piece of paper, and you don't need it to prove your love.
Today, this concept is more accepted in contrast to the traditional gender roles of women fifty years
ago.
The culture of today's society has a whole new view. As with the gender specific roles, the line
of specificity is getting blurrier and blurrier. Years ago, the term “respect” held a higher meaning, as
in if you were a child, you could only speak when spoken to. You would be spanked if you got up from
the dinner without being excused, and don't ever get caught going against your parents words.
Today, it really depends on the household morals and views. Some parents still raise their
children that way. Some households still hold traditional values, and everyone sits together as a
family for at least one meal in a day.
The more I pay attention to these details in my peer's households, the more I notice that the
traditional values hardly exist. Most of the time, as my mother would put it, it is a “fend for yourself

5. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
night.” With that, she means, cook your own food, and eat where you want to. This became the
norm in my household. We probably only ate together on holidays, if that. But that doesn't mean
that our family doesn't love each other, we just express it in different ways than the household that
takes on the traditional approach.
Efficiency is a pronounced characteristic in today's society. The term “McDonaldization” was
invented by George Ritzer through a book he wrote in 1993 about the rationalization taken to
extreme levels in society. He explains it as “The process of McDonaldization takes a task and breaks it
down into smaller tasks. This is repeated until all tasks have been broken down to the smallest
possible level. The resulting tasks are then rationalized to find the single most efficient method for
completing each task. All other methods are then deemed inefficient and discarded”
("McDonaldization.com - What Is It?").
I've noticed a direct correlation between Ritzer's term and the new-age family's norms. These
new norms could be defined as social deviance . With McDonaldization, there is a task that is broken
down into smaller tasks until the most efficient method is at hand. Some families can't afford the
time to eat together, so the head of the household provides the tools (a.k.a. Food) necessary to
complete the task of feeding the family. Even though the head of the household may be too busy to
sit down with the family to eat, he is still providing. That's what is most efficient, after all.
Deviance is breaking away from the norms of society. Without deviance, families would be
stuck struggling to try to sit down as a family to eat, even though there is work to be done.
In order for deviance to be recognized, “a group in a given society that has a lot of power will
have a major role in defining what acts are deviant. But for this to work most people must

6. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
acknowledge that power ("Deviance and Social Control").”
The way I see it, is that the American government could be looked at as the group that has a
lot of power. The government made laws, (some reasonable and some not), that the people must
follow. It is considered to be deviant behavior to defy these laws. Breaking the serious laws, like
murdering someone, would be considered deviant behavior. People tend to look past minor
infractions such as a speeding ticket or running a red light.
Often with families that have two hard working parents, the socialization between them and
their children are a lot different than the traditional family. Aside from not eating as a family, the
working parents may have to raise their children with the assistance of after school organizations, like
the ones held at the YMCA. These children may grow up easier here than if their parent's let
themselves into the house alone after school. With this form of socialization, the child will be less
likely to turn to the streets, and develop a more social personality since he/she is constantly around
people.
In today's society, gays are being accepted, and the military is even turning a blind eye to their
sexual preferences. Even twenty years ago, people were afraid to “come out of the closet” and be
who they want to be. Even when they did express the way that they felt, they were ridiculed and
there was a stigma attached to their names. Instead of being looked at for their positive attributes,
people could only describe them as being gay or lesbian.
Self-expressing, body positive social groups like LGBT (Lesbian Gay Bi-sexual Transvestite) has
brought a new light to the community: showing that gays are just like everybody else and may just be
the epitome of the new-age accepting generation. Even adoption agencies are pro-gay. The gay

7. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
community gives homes to those who may not ever sit down at a family dinner. As Amy, the
Executive Director of Connecting Hearts Adoption Services in Orlando Florida puts it, “I have met with
couples who despite their desire to adopt, kept hitting brick wall after brick wall simply because they
did not know where to turn to find LGBT-friendly adoption agencies... All of our client families have
taught me about the power of love, acceptance and dedication” (Imber, 2014).
Aside from organizations like LGBT, other social groups impact us in our every day lives. Work
may be where you spend most of your time if you are like every other struggling American today. It is
important to most people to create strong work relationships because that is where most of their
time is spent. Who wants to go to work around a bunch of people that hate you? I've personally
made pretty strong relationships at work. Some are good, some are bad. The good relationships
have the potential to better your work experience. In restaurants, where I've worked since I was
legally able to, I've noticed that you have to at least remain positive. For example, when your table
section gets really busy, if no one likes you, they won't help you. Your tips will suffer, and therefor
your personal life will suffer. If you create positive relationships at work, your co-workers may not
mind taking a couple drinks out for you.
School relationships are also key factors in one's socialization. As with work, people going to
school may spend the majority of their time studying and working with class-mates on assignments. If
you create negative relationships in the classroom, your peers may not want to help you out when
you don't understand a concept and the teacher isn't there to reassure your doubts.
Just as social groups impact our lives, so do formal organizations. An example of a formal
organization would be science. They socialize with each other through scientific meetings, where

8. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
they discuss issues at hand. Without science, we would not understand the world as we do, and
medicine would not exist.
These social groups all tie into the conflict theory developed by Kyle Marx- where society is
composed of groups that are competing with one another for scarce resources. The term “resources”
makes it seem like Marx is speaking of us humans like animals, scavenging for food, and fighting over
the last deer. But what I believe what he means, is that we are all fighting to get to the top of the
totem-pole.
With work, we are all fighting for the hard-earned promotion. In my case, we are all fighting
over the table that is sure to tip over 20% of the bill. We all work to make money, to in turn,
potentially better our lives.
With school, we are all fighting to earn the highest GPA, which may in turn, land us the higher
paying job. I believe that the people who claim that they want a good job just to enjoy work are lying.
I like to ponder on this thought; would I work for free? Would I spend 40+ hours a week sitting
behind a desk to make no money? The answer is no. We are all fighting for our futures. We all spend
all-nighters trying to knock out the ten page paper our teacher assigned to us out of the blue. There
isn't a supernatural force pushing us to do our work, but the thought of achieving our dreams is
enough to keep us going.
Another instance, why do we bother to speak with strangers, when they will probably have no
effect on our lives? Why do we even bother socializing, and asking, “how are you?” The average
person will reply “okay, and how are you?” even if they just found out their best friend died. People
who do not know each other most likely don't have a level of trust to share their deepest secrets on

9. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
the crowded subway.
Some believe that talking to strangers has its benefits. Thorin Klosowski, an online blogger for
lifehacker.com, claims that “The great thing about strangers is that we tend to put on our happy face
when we meet them, reserving our crankier side for the people we know and love” (Klosowski, 2014).
I see a lot of truth to this phrase. I've noticed a significant change in my mood after mustering up the
confidence to talk to a complete stranger. Whether it be in line to get chipotle, or sitting on a park
bench, it just feels good to break the normal cycle of my day and “smell the roses” for a change.
The difference between social classes could make a huge difference on who wouldn't talk to a
stranger vs. who would. I've noticed that lower class individuals don't feel like they are too good to
talk to a stranger, no matter who they may be. Higher class individuals tend to be “uppity” and not
care the least bit about stranger's predicaments.
This difference can be further explained through Kyle Marx's belief that the engine of human
history is class conflict. “Society is made up of two social classes,” he said, “and they are natural
enemies: the bourgeoisie (the capitalists, those who own the capital, land, factories, and machines)
and the proletariat (the exploited workers, who do not own the means of production)” (Henslin, The
Sociological Perspective, 2015). He believed that eventually the proletariat (lower class) would break
free of their bound to the higher class and everyone would work to their abilities for resources.
Between these classes, there is a social structure. Society has a set of norms on how to act in
certain people's presence. For example, we are schooled at a young age about how to interact with
and respect your elders, especially your grandparents. But what makes older people more
respectable than us? They say that with age comes wisdom. I disagree. An old person that held the

10. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
same job their whole lives and went home straight after work to watch television is way less
experienced than for instance, a student fresh out of college. This student may even work a part-time
job and volunteer at the homeless shelter. I would hold a higher respect for the college student,
struggling to do everything to better him/herself while also helping others, over the older person that
sits in front of the television after work every day.
With social structure, there are invisible boundary lines, and non-verbal forms of
communication. For example, it is out of the norm to sit next to a stranger on the bus, when there
are plenty of open chairs away from the stranger. The norm of our Western society's culture is to give
approximately 3.7-4.5 meters of space between you and a stranger. “Understanding these distances
allows us to approach others in non-threatening and appropriate ways. People can begin to
understand how others feel about them, how they view the relationship and, if appropriate, adjust
their behaviour accordingly ("Non-Verbal Communication", 2011).”
Stratification and inequality can be “analyzed as micro-, meso-, and macro-level phenomena,
as they are produced in small group interactions, through organizations and institutions, and through
global economic structures.”
“Micro-level analysis focuses on how prestige and personal influence create inequality through
face-to-face and small group interactions. Meso-level analysis focuses on how connections to
organizations and institutions produce inequality. Macro-level analysis considers the role of economic
systems in shaping individuals' resources and opportunities ("Global Stratification and Inequality",
2014).”
For example, on a micro-level, when a child born into a family that is well-educated, the child

11. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
is more likely to succeed. On the flip side, a child born into a lower class neighborhood to parents
that aren't well educated, the child may fall into the streets and not succeed. Another instance,
through the many people applying for a job, the job interviewer will pick a few that have the best
resumes, then whoever displays the best charisma would get the job.
On a meso-level, one could look at a family for an example. The people that make up the
family could be the institutions, and the family as a whole connects to other families and
organizations. In some parts of the globe, it's a common thing for a man to have many wives. To him,
this gives a better chance at spreading his seed.
In America, having one wife gives a man enough emotional support, that he doesn't usually
feel the need to have more than one. In America, having more than one wife would require much
more monetary support (Ballantine, 2008, p. 336).
On a macro-level of stratification, within families, there is a trend called “cohabitation.”
Cohabitation is “living together in a sexual relationship without marriage (Ballantine, 2008, p. 340).”
In North American and European countries, the amount of cohabitation couples is growing more and
more every year. Even though the divorce rates are also growing, there are a lot of couples who stay
together without marriage who are unaccounted for.
In some countries, it is almost forbidden to have a sexual relationship and live with someone
without being married. This is just one of many difference between North America/European
countries vs. others.
References

12. Katie Lighthall
11-23-14
8:00 Class
Ballantine, J. (2008). Family: Partner Taking, People Making, and Contract Breaking. In Schools and
society: A sociological approach to education (3rd ed., p. 336). Los Angeles: Pine Forge Press.
Deviance and Social Control. (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~jmahoney/deviance.htm
Gender - Boundless Open Textbook. (2014). Retrieved from
https://www.boundless.com/sociology/textbooks/boundless-sociology-textbook/global-
stratification-and-inequality-8/stratification-systems-67/gender-400-10392/
Global Stratification and Inequality - Boundless Open Textbook. (2014). Retrieved from
https://www.boundless.com/sociology/textbooks/412/global-stratification-and-inequality-
8/global-stratification-68/global-stratification-and-inequality-401-10459/
Henslin, J. (2015). The Sociological Perspective. Pearson Custom Sociology. Pearson Learning
Solutions, Massachusetts: Pearson.
Henslin, J. (2015). THE SOCIOLOGY OF GENDER- Theoretical Perspectives and Feminist Frameworks.
Pearson Custom Sociology. Pearson Learning Solutions, Massachusetts: Pearson.
Imber, A. (2014). Learning the Power of Love, Acceptance and Dedication from LGBT Families.
Retrieved from
http://www.hrc.org/blog/entry/learning-the-power-of-love-acceptance-and-dedication-from-
lgbt-families
Klosowski, T. (2014, August 20). The Hidden Benefits of Talking to Strangers. Retrieved from
http://lifehacker.com/the-hidden-benefits-of-talking-to-strangers-1624143630
McDonaldization.com - What Is It? (n.d.). Retrieved from
http://www.mcdonaldization.com/whatisit.shtml
Non-Verbal Communication. (2011). Retrieved from
http://www.skillsyouneed.com/ips/nonverbal-communication.html
Pay Equity & Discrimination. (2010). Retrieved from
http://www.iwpr.org/initiatives/pay-equity-and-discrimination