He finds mostly middle-class men trying to cope with the legacy of fathers who gave little emotional sustenance and with a competitive society they find unsatisfying, who sympathize with many of women's complaints about men and sexism (though Schwalbe also finds that many joined as a reaction to what they saw as feminism's blanket indictment of men), and who are searching for an alternative to the traditional image of a man as rational, tough, ambitious, and in control.
He finds mostly middle-class men trying to cope with the legacy of fathers who gave little emotional sustenance and with a competitive society they find unsatisfying, who sympathize with many of women's complaints about men and sexism (though Schwalbe also finds that many joined as a reaction to what they saw as feminism's blanket indictment of men), and who are searching for an alternative to the traditional image of a man as rational, tough, ambitious, and in control.
In this first comparative analysis of men's and women's prisons, Dana Britton identifies the factors that influence the genderization of the American workplace, a process that often leaves women in lower-paying jobs with less prestige and responsibility.
The powerful case for a society of mutual respect. As various forms of social welfare were dismantled though the last decade of the twentieth century, many thinkers argued that human well-being was best served by a focus on potential, not need. Richard Sennett thinks differently. In this dazzling blend of personal memoir and reflective scholarship, he addresses need and social responsibility across the gulf of inequality. In the uncertain world of "flexible" social relationships, all are troubled by issues of respect: whether it is an employee stuck with insensitive management, a social worker trying to aid a resentful client, or a virtuoso artist and an accompanist aiming for a perfect duet. Opening with a memoir of growing up in Chicago's infamous Cabrini Green housing project, Richard Sennett looks at three factors that undermine mutual respect: unequal ability, adult dependency, and degrading forms of compassion. In contrast to current welfare "reforms," Sennett proposes a welfare system based on respect for those in need. He explores how self-worth can be nurtured in an unequal society (for example, through dedication to craft); how self-esteem must be balanced with feeling for others; and how mutual respect can forge bonds across the divide of inequality. Where erasing inequality was once the goal of social radicals, Sennett seeks a more humane meritocracy: a society that, while accepting inequalities of talent, seeks to nurture the best in all its members and to connect them strongly to one another.
During the last three decades of the twentieth century there has been widespread controversy over, and alteration of, gender roles in the United States. To a large extent the ferment originated in, and was influenced by, the general social upheaval of the sixties. A major result has been a well-publicized transformation in the options, social status, and perception of American women. But what affected women also affected men, and a similar movement among American males therefore accompanied the feminist movement. In Uneasy Males, Edward Gambill provides an historical overview of the American "men's movement". The book covers pro-feminist and anti-feminist responses, and the organization and activities of men's rights, father's rights, "mythopoetic", religious, and black male groups. While much of the focus is on the development and operation of formal organizations, there is also coverage of changes apart from these structures. Uneasy males thus provide readers with an understanding of, and thought-provoking question about, gender roles in the United States.
Young men undergo significant changes during their years in college. They wrestle with "big questions," which are essentially spiritual questions, as they ponder who they are, what they believe, what kind of persons they want to become, and how they might shape the world into something they can feel comfortable being themselves in. Those who participate in men's groups realize that their involvement can nurture their inner lives as they explore these questions and connect to transcendent values and a vision of a larger whole. This book includes historical and sociological perspectives on men and spirituality and an expanded case study of how one campus pioneered in the development of men's spirituality groups, which became a model for other campuses. It includes quantitative empirical research that explores college men's openness to spirituality and their interest in men's groups. The book's most extensive discussion is based on a qualitative analysis of thirty-six interviews with male college students, focusing on their understanding of the relationship between their masculinity and their spirituality, and how spirituality groups provided a venue in which they could begin to engage what it means to be spiritual and what it means to be a man.
Founders, classics, and canons have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology’s identity. Within the academy today, a number of positions—feminist, postmodernist, postcolonial—question the status of “tradition." In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr defends the continuing importance of sociology’s classics and traditions in a university education. Baehr offers arguments against interpreting, defending, and attacking sociology’s great texts and authors in terms of founders and canons. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be “founded" and why the term “founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of “canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken. Although he questions the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning these concepts have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or attack the liberal university tradition.
Three categories-founders, classics, canons-have been vitally important in helping to frame sociology's precarious identity, defining the discipline's sense of its past and the implications for its current activity. Today that identity is being challenged as never before. Within the academy, a number of positions-feminist, postmodernist, poststructuralist, postcolonial-converge in questioning the status of "the tradition." These currents, in turn, reflect wider social questioning about the meaning and uses of knowledge in technologically advanced societies. In Founders, Classics, Canons, Peter Baehr scrutinizes the nature of this challenge. He provides a model of the processes through which texts are elevated to classic status, and defends the continuing importance of sociology's traditions for a university education in the social sciences. The concept of "classic" is, as Baehr notes, a complex one. Essentially it assumes a scale of judgment that deems certain texts as exemplary in eminence. But what is the nature of this eminence? Baehr analyzes various responses to this question. Most notable are those that focus on the functions classics perform for the scholarly community that employs them; the rhetorical force classics are said to possess; and the processes of reception that result in classic status. The concept of classic is often equated with two other notions: "founders" and "canon." The former has a well-established pedigree within the discipline, but widespread usage of the latter in sociology is much more recent and polemical in tone. Baehr offers arguments against these two ways of interpreting, defending and attacking sociology's great texts and authors. He demonstrates why, in logical and historical terms, discourses and traditions cannot actually be "founded" and why the term "founder" has little explanatory content. Equally, he takes issue with the notion of "canon" and argues that the analogy between the theological canon and sociological classic texts, though seductive, is mistaken. While questioning the uses to which the concepts of founder, classic, and canon have been put, Baehr's purpose is not dismissive. On the contrary, he seeks to understand the value and meaning they have for the people who employ them in the cultural battle to affirm or excoriate the liberal university tradition. In examining the tactics of this battle, this volume offers a model of how social theory can be critical rather than radical. Peter Baehr teaches in the department of politics and sociology, Lingnan University, Hong Kong. His previous book for Transaction, Caesar and the Fading of the Roman World, was designated an "Outstanding Academic Book" by Choice.
