Disposable Ties and the Urban Poor
Matthew Desmond
Sociologists long have observed that the urban poor rely on kinship networks to survive economic destitution. Drawing on ethnographic fieldwork among evicted tenants in high-poverty neighborhoods, this article presents a new explanation for urban survival, one that emphasizes the importance of disposable ties formed between strangers. To meet their most pressing needs, evicted families often relied more on new acquaintances than on kin. Disposable ties facilitated the flow of various resources, but often bonds were brittle and fleeting. The strategy of forming, using, and burning disposable ties allowed families caught in desperate situations to make it from one day to the next, but it also bred instability and fostered misgivings among peers.
Who Am I and Who Are We? Conflicting Narratives of Collective Selfhood in Stigmatized Groups
Dawne Moon
Identity politics arises out of conditions of systematic stigmatization and structural disadvantage, but sharing a social structural position does not guarantee that people will define themselves and their collectivity in the same way. In fact, because identity politics occupies two major points of tension, it gives rise to several alternative ways of conceptualizing the “we,” the collective self. Using ethnographic material gathered on American Jews’ understandings of anti-Semitism and its relationship to contemporary politics, this article inductively discerns four alternative models of collective selfhood (embattled, relating, political, and redeemed) that correspond to four alternative narratives of identity politics (reified identity, humanistic dialogue, critical solidarity, and evangelism). These narratives help explain the deep emotions sparked by challenges to people’s self-definitions. A comparison to studies of LGBT movements further reveals the utility of this conceptualization and elaborates a model not apparent in the first case.
Legal Violence: Immigration Law and the Lives of Central American Immigrants
Cecilia Menjívar, Leisy J. Abrego
This article analyzes how Central American immigrants in tenuous legal statuses experience current immigration laws. Based on ethnographic observations and over 200 interviews conducted between 1998 and 2009 with immigrants in Los Angeles and Phoenix and individuals in sending communities, this study reveals how the convergence and implementation of immigration and criminal law constitute forms of violence. Drawing on theories of structural and symbolic violence, the authors use the analytic category “legal violence” to capture the normalized but cumulatively injurious effects of the law. The analysis focuses on three central and interrelated areas of immigrants’ lives—work, family, and schooling—to expose how the criminalization of immigrants at the federal, state, and local levels is not only exclusionary but also generates violent effects for individual immigrants and their families, affecting everyday lives and long-term incorporation processes.
When Do Fathers Care? Mothers’ Economic Contribution and Fathers’ Involvement in Child Care
Sara Raley, Suzanne M. Bianchi, Wendy Wang
Previous literature suggests a tenuous link between fathers’ care of children and maternal employment and earnings. This study shows that the link is stronger when measures of caregiving capture fathers’ increased responsibility for children. The analysis of time diary data from 6,572 married fathers and 7,376 married mothers with children under age 13 indicates that fathers (1) engage in more “solo” care of children when their wives are employed, (2) are more likely to do the kind of child care associated with responsibility for their children when their wives spend more time in the labor market, and (3) participate more in routine care when their wives contribute a greater share of the couple’s earnings. In addition, the “father care” to “mother care” ratio rises when mothers contribute a greater share of household earnings.
Organized Labor and Racial Wage Inequality in the United States
Jake Rosenfeld, Meredith Kleykamp
Why have African-American private-sector unionization rates surpassed those of white workers for decades, and how has private-sector union decline exacerbated black-white wage inequality? Using data from the Current Population Survey (1973–2007), the authors show that African-Americans join unions for protection against discriminatory treatment in nonunion sectors. A model-predicted wage series also shows that, among women, black-white weekly wage gaps would be between 13% and 30% lower if union representation remained at high levels. The effect of deunionization on racial wage inequality for men is less substantial, but without deunionization, weekly wages for black men would be an estimated $49 higher. The results recast organized labor as an institution vital for its economic inclusion of African-American men and women. This study points to the need to move beyond class-based analyses of union decline to an understanding of the gendered role unions once played in mitigating racial inequality.
Commentary and Debate
The Israeli Kibbutzim and the Westermarck Hypothesis: Does Early Association Dampen Sexual Passion? A Comment on Shor and Simchai
Alexandra Maryanski, Stephen K. Sanderson, Raymond Russell
Exposing the Myth of Sexual Aversion in the Israeli Kibbutzim: A Challenge to the Westermarck Hypothesis
Eran Shor, Dalit Simchai
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.