Notes the week of 9/28-10/2
Notes the week of 9/28-10/2 SOCI 1101
Popular in Intro to Sociology
Popular in Sociology
This 8 page Class Notes was uploaded by Paige Notetaker on Monday October 5, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to SOCI 1101 at University of Georgia taught by Cooney in Fall 2015. Since its upload, it has received 44 views. For similar materials see Intro to Sociology in Sociology at University of Georgia.
Reviews for Notes the week of 9/28-10/2
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 10/05/15
Sociology 928 Morphoogy morphology is the relational dimension of life The big picture huge number of family forms 2parents nuclear families unusual in human societies eg 2 parents amp children living in same household Family forms polygamy 90 of societies many different forms of marriage eg women marrying women extended families very common married men may eat amp sleep separately from their wives amp children the family US family forms have become more diverse in past 50 years one big change increase in 1parent families in the US does this matter some say no others yes NO many types of family structures are successful in human societies the quality of parenting is more important than its quantity YES kids need 2 parents to provide the sustained support required to succeed in life today what does the research say The question not interested in making value judgements do children from oneparent families do as well as children from 2 parents families unwed mothers of children born in 1960 5 2013 41 of whites 1960 2 2013 29 of Af Americans196020 2013 71 sense of scale of increase of hispanics 1980 24 2001 53 of asians 1990 12 2001 17 about 40 of unwed mothers today are cohabiting and some will either later cohabit or marry still a high of children born to unwed mothers grow up for some or all of their childhood in 1parent households Singleparenthood over 50 of US children today will spend some or all of their childhood in a 1parent household most 80 will live with their mothers Mclanahan Schwartz find that kids from intact 2parent families on average complete more years of education find and keep better jobs more often avoid single parenthood or crime How big are the differences depends on how you see them 90 of kids from 2parent families complete high school compared to 80 of kids from singleparenthood families you can see this as 1 a 125 increase in completion 10 of 80 2 a 100 double increase in noncompletion 20 of 10 Social statistics take care reading social statistics it is easy to have large percentage increases when the starting percentage is small english study smoking pot daily increases the risk of schrizophrenia by 40 ooking more closelythe risk for nonsmokers is 1 for smokers 14 true but misleading What type of 1parent families do kids of nevermarried parents do worse than of divorced parents no divorce undoes the good of having 2 parents this is in general may be different for kids in highly conflicted 2 parent households do kids of cohabiting parents do worse than kids of married parents we don39t know Why the differences money yes most 1 parent families poor than 2 parent families also kids of widowed mothers typically get money and do as well as kids in 2 parent households but kids from step families get more money amp don t do any better than other kids from 1parent families other factors include parental attentionsupervision loss of social support loss of parent Summary the increase in 1parent families has been very controversial ots of strong opinions as to whether 1parent families are bad m kids from 1parent families do fine but m kids from 1parent families are less successful than kids from 2 parent families exception kids in widowed families ots more research to be done maybe 1parent families have other strengths eg those who survive do better but overall in our society kids from 2 parent families somewhere fare better on average Sociology 930 How we live today today more on the family and contemporary living arrangements 1 Cohabitation number of unmarried parents living together 1960 29 million 2010 75 million same trend is visible in other wealthy countries a big change Who cohabitation has increased among all age groups eg percentage of couples under 30 has risen from 11 in 1970 to about 50 today cohabitation rates higher among more dualearners and higherearners Why for some a substitute for marriage but for majority a trial marriage however only about 13 of cohabiters marry within 3 years of starting to live together marriage more likely for whites and higher earners than minorities or low earners Successful trial does cohabitation reduce risk of divorce no it slightly raises the risk may breed more casual attitude toward marriage but main reason selection effect Selection effect people who marry wor without cohabiting not identical those who cohabit have characteristics that predict divorce anyway eg people who cohabit tend to be less religion less religious people less likely to stay in an unhappy marriage 2 Divorce divorce was once very rare and deviant increase in early 20th century big increase in 196085 decline since then you ve probably heard that 50 of marriages end in divorce yet not even close to half of my friends are divorced how is that the statistics refer to marriages not people ex suppose you and your 3 best friends get married 3 of you stay married and one person marries and divorces 3 times the rate of divorce for the group is 50 risk factors marriage under 21 divorced parents divorced at least once had child prior to marriage childless mariage financial hardship partners different social class race age religion 3 Equality modern families married or not are more equal women still do more of the household chores even when employed outside the home but men are doing more decisionmaking in common and less domestic violence modern children also treated more equally than previously one reason temporary nature of family after age 18 children free to go their separate way 4 Smaller families in 1900 average US woman had 4 children today average women has 2 children family reunions fewer siblings soon means fewer cousins aunts uncles nephews and nieces gotten way smaller population growth low fertility in many wealthy countries means shrinking pop eg Germany Italy Japan but population decline offset because of immigration hence these societies becoming more diverse 5 Gay couples Holland 1st country to legalize samsex marriage in 2001 US 2015 Supreme court ruled that gays could not be refused a marriage license 2010 census 14 of samesex households have children 6 More single living more people living alone around the world especially in wealthier countries this both reflects and reinforces the individualism of modern society Klineberg K argues that in US this is fueled by eg more dual employed parents amp larger houses with fewer people young people today accustomed to their own space having one s own place has become symbol of adulthood prospect of living alone often causes anxiety but the experience is positive for most people those who do so often very active socially and have time and energy for causes greater then themselves of their families Summary more people now live alone or cohabit the US family has become more informal smaller and more equal Sociology 102 Music Bergesen morphological variables help explain styles of Af American music from spirituals in the period of slavery to soul music in the civil rights era Bergesen buids on the work of Basil Bernstein who built on Emile Durkeim Bernstein sociolinguist people use language in different ways Language restricted meant for insiders small vocab simple grammar group references we us slanginsider words eaborated meant for strangers large vocab complex grammar individual references me Why Bernstein not social class group intimacy or communal solidarity eaborated use is product of distant relationships and communities Bergesen extends this reasoning to a different form of communication music Bergesen music form of language musical lang should respond to changes in group intimacy African American music illustrates this African American musical styles slavery intimacy restricted spirituals harmonies hidden messages migration distance elaborated blues private troubles flexible jazz abstract individualized civil rights intimacy restricted soul collective joyful how does hip hop fit in Since the 60 s ess cohesive growth of middleclass suburbanization many left behind in poverty facing common problems period of intermediate intimacy hip hop reflects this both restricted amp elaborated Hiphop restricted slang the N word common suffering poverty drug police communal setting parties clubs insider status symbols regular thumping rhythm frequent use of harmonies sampling borrowing from other artists Hiphop elaborated individual styles of rapping personal struggles music a vehicle for individual advancement boasting me me me manipulative attitude toward the sexes Summary Bergesens theory music changes with changes in intimacy for group solidarity greater intimacy breeds restricted musical languages ess intimacy breeds restricted musical languages some empirical support BUT needs more work Tasks for future 1 Measure intimacy solidarity more clearly 2 Measure musical styles more accurately 3 See if theory applies more widely to the music of there social groups such as rural whites Latinos the Irish
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'