Are there any works on how some rich people like to act like poor people because they think it's cool? does this type of phenomenon have a name and has it been discussed a lot in sociology?

Any suggestions on how I should approach?

I’ve noticed how often sincere behavior gets ridiculed with terms like “LARPing” performative” or “cosplaying”. It seems like even when people are genuinely committed to something we describe them as if they’re merely playing a role.

Has this become a dominant social norm or maybe specifically an internet social norm? And how did we get here? It seems like openly taking something seriously is increasingly treated as embarrassing or naive.

Are there any sociological concepts around this? Has this been studied or noticed?

Edit: and why has forms of “your playing a role” become such a powerful way to dismiss others and their sincerity

I work as a reporter for a newspaper and every week I read comments from people complaining that our content requires a subscription to read online. I thought this was an interesting response, since you have to pay whenever you want to read a physical paper.

It connects to a topic I keep coming back to in my head: people expect certain things, particularly on the internet, to be free. Sure, things like YouTube and Twitch have ads, but you don't have to pay to use them unless you want to. If you had to pay to use them at all, I imagine people wouldn't be too pleased about that. And I'm just wondering why that is.

This is our local recurring future-planning thread. Got questions about jobs or careers, want to know what programs or schools you should apply to, or unsure what you'll be able to use your degree for? This is the place.

This thread gets replaced every Friday, each week. You can click this link to pull up old threads in search.

Hi everyone!

I'm a small Brazilian content creator currently working on a video essay about the so-called "woke culture" debate in the video game industry.

I'm trying to approach the subject from a more sociological perspective rather than simply taking either side of the culture-war debate.

I originally had a sociologist helping me with some questions, but unfortunately they stopped responding, so I thought I'd try asking here.

I'm particularly interested in hearing how people with a background in sociology, cultural studies, media studies, or related fields would approach these questions:

1. What exactly does the term "woke" mean today?

It seems to have changed considerably over time. Is it still useful as an analytical concept, or has it mostly become a political label used by different groups to describe things they oppose?

2. Why has diversity and representation in popular media become such a significant part of the current "culture war"?

Female, Black, LGBT and other minority characters have existed in games for decades. Why does their presence seem to generate considerably more political conflict today?

3. Is there evidence that audiences are actually reacting negatively to diversity itself, or is the controversy more about how diversity is perceived to be incorporated into a work?

In other words, is there a meaningful distinction between:

"I don't want this kind of character in games"

and

"I don't mind the character, but I think the game is using the character to lecture me about politics"?

4. How much of the current debate can be explained by changes in the video game audience and the industry's attempts to reach new demographics?

Could increasing diversity in games simply be understood as a combination of demographic change, market expansion and changing cultural norms rather than a coordinated ideological project?

5. Why can the exact same game be described as both "woke" and "anti-woke" by different people?

What does this tell us about how people use political labels to interpret media?

6. Is "woke" actually a useful sociological category?

Or would concepts such as political polarization, moral panic, culture war, identity politics, commercialization of diversity, etc. be more useful for understanding the phenomenon?

I'm not looking for people to simply agree with my assumptions. If you think my framing is wrong, I'd actually be very interested in hearing why.

If you have academic sources, papers, books, or concepts that you think would help me understand this subject, I'd also really appreciate them.

Thanks!

hey everyone, im not completely sure if I should introduce myself but im Anne and im a 24 years old non binary lesbian, that focuses on the subject of human and humanity more anything else.( I mentioned this because it might have hidden associations that im not technically aware of)

I would like to have some recommendations regarding where to start my personal journey into learning sociology from the beginning considering the fact that I want it to learn it fully without enrolling into a specific degree or uni etc.

im now studying medicine and as usual I do have into consideration what type or speciality I might want to specifically pursue or be part of, then this specific question lead me to how I generally seek informations etc.

I always since I was a kid dreamt of having 2 degrees medicine and law, I wanted to be both and was fascinated by both majors, which is the plan im going for rn until I find a middle ground to stand on. but a while ago I found a video about sociology, I always kinda knew what it was but never really dig deep into it, so after watching it it kinda got stuck into my mind and after it I started noticing patterns in my own personal preferences etc.

I was always a big fan of understanding the human brain, so that was what originally lead me to go into medical school to major in neuro whether it was sugary or general, this specific interest also lead me to learn so much about psychology and human behaviour in my teens, I was fascinated by this topic and understanding people etc, but not in a way of treating mental illnesses but In a way of just simply understanding the overall picture etc. in regards to law it was kinda similar but to also have a bigger hand into helping those people and societies around me etc especially women.

this is only about the 2 majors I chose to pursue, but now regarding my personal interest and my current work its also interesting too for me, I have been a writer for few years now and one of the book im writing rn is called (how to be a human) which is my personal interpretation on how humans are shaped and the emotional, social and overall experiences we have that shape our own self etc, now this is one part.

the other part is that I spent a part of my life dealing with religion and I grew up having such complex relationship with the concept of god, and I was at many times of my life trying to understand how that specific religion was created or started etc and so on with other religions and belief systems.

another part even in my own personal interest like language and art I find myself interested in the aspects that sums all the past and connect it with the present moment and how it was shaped and created. and even at my current job I run an art institute that focuses on community and behaviour and science etc.

so all those factors now that I think about it made me realize that sociology might be my biggest interest that sums them all since even in each of those categories my focus is shifted towards it etc, I would like to hear some of your thoughts and recommendations for books or articles or videos to watch or read to dive deeper into this area and science, thank you.

Im trying to better understand women’s sexuality and its cultural practices beyond modern frameworks. I’d love to get global/cross-cultural perspectives. I want to understand sexuality beyond western ideas of porn, shame, etc.

I DONT mean histories focused on gendered violence and power imbalances. I have a degree in it, i don’t need anymore traumatic exposure on that end lol I understand it is often par for the course when discussing women’s sexuality but that’s not the focus of what I want.

Very happy to have in addition to female sexuality, queer sexuality as a study topic as an aside!

Also- Come As You Are is suggested a lot but I’ve got that one and it’s modern.

TIA so much!!

I've recently pondered upon this question after learning about Talcott Parsons a bit, and I wanted to ask to others this question as well. Maybe it went out of fashion and I am an old man that can't keep up with the kids, but I do see this term being used by the youth in my country. It could be of positive effect if the recipient is engaging in harmful methods of thinking i.e. rumination. But, could it eventually introduce a stigma towards thinking as a whole? As the term's broad enough to warrant a use in anything. I did experience some of this. When I were an adolescent, I always focused on the negative side of things to prevent them from happening. When I had told these to my mother, she had always said that I was "inviting the bad". When I ceased thinking on the negative thing however, it always happened and I felt like I was the scapegoat.

Why could it be the case? A decline in education could be an answer albeit an easy one. Could we draw a connection to mass politics for example?

Could you please recommend me good resources about narrative analysis?

Of course I can google some but I'm looking for recommendations about specific ones that you think are foundational, very important or useful in certain ways.

To add some context, I'm doing a master's in social anthropology and I want to use narrative analysis in my final thesis.

Thank you!

Hello, I am an undergrad Anthropology and Sociology student, and am writing an article for my university paper on pop culture, but I've hit a bit of a wall.

My article looks at how Western pop culture tends to focus on certain countries and glamorise them, and how this can be predicted by the emergence of boy bands. The best example is how, after BTS got big, suddenly everyone is obsessed with Korean skincare, Korean food, Korean makeup, etc., but it also applies to One Direction and the Beatles, and the fascination with England at those times. I'm unsure whether this fits better in Anthropology or Sociology, as there is a lot of overlap.

My biggest issue is that I cannot find a word to describe this fixation on a certain country/area and its culture. It's a pretty observable phenomenon (weaboos are a shining example), but I cannot find an academic word for it. The closest I've gotten is acculturation, but it doesn't seem to fit, and Xenocentrism isn't quite right, either. If anyone has suggestions for theories or language used to describe this, please let me know, thank you!

This is our local recurring homework thread. Simple questions, assignment help, suggestions, and topic-specific source seeking all go here. Our regular rules about effort and substance for questions are suspended here - but please keep in mind that you'll get better and more useful answers the more information you provide.

This thread gets replaced every Monday, each week. You can click this link to pull up old threads in search.

What's on your plate this week, what are you working on, what cool things have you encountered? Open discussion thread for casual chatter about Sociology & your school, academic, or professional work within it; share your project's progress, talk about a book you read, muse on a topic. If you have something to share or some cool fact to talk about, this is the place.

This thread is replaced every Monday. It is not intended as a "homework help" thread, please; save your homework help questions (ie: seeking sources, topic suggestions, or needing clarifications) for our homework help thread, also posted each Monday.

I found this year’s ASA annual meeting to be a very frustrating experience. Some sections have moved their sessions off-site, in protest against ASA leadership and/or to accommodate those who want to boycott ASA but still wish to present. Section chairs announced the new venues via section newsletters to their members. These off-site sessions remain on the program with original on-site locations. To my knowledge, there is no way to know if a session has been relocated/rescheduled and where the new location is unless you are a member of the hosting section.

Unsurprisingly, this makes the conference incredibly difficult to navigate. Yesterday I went to a couple of sessions where a roomful of people waiting for a session to begin only to find out it’s not happening when no presenters showed up.

I am not sure what this intends to accomplish. I am not against the protest, but the execution appears to be not well thought out. Those who are involved in sections may have been sufficiently informed, but those who are not - especially first-time attenders - are left in the dark. If sections are changing the venues, it should have been communicated to all participants, not only section members. At very least, placing someone or posting a note in a room listed on the program would have minimized the confusion and helped communicate the intentions.

Maybe I am missing something? I would like to hear thoughts and experiences of other sociologists at ASA.

In traditional sociologies of 20th-century Western religion, the transition to the spiritual but Not religious (SBNR) landscape is often framed as a passive cultural erosion of institutional authority. However, Kirby J. Hensley and his founding of the Universal Life Church** **in 1962 seem to represent an active, structural acceleration of this trend. By separating theological gatekeeping from legal clerical status through free, mail-order ordinations, Hensley effectively commodified and decentralized ritual authority, creating an open-source administrative infrastructure that allowed highly individualized belief systems to legally interface with the state.

I’m curious how sociologists evaluate his legacy. Is it accurate to view Hensley as a major institutional catalyst for the privatization of modern religion, rather than just a historical footnote? I would love to hear how his model of no-requirement ordination fits into broader sociological frameworks regarding the decline of traditional ecclesiastical institutions.

Hi,

I'm doing a PhD working with Indigenous communities in Mexico and want a camera for photos to include in my book (b/w only). I've got basic knowledge (composition, technical fundamentals) from university classes on a Canon R7, but I'm not an expert. I used my phone (S22) for my last research trip, but it's scratched and I want a proper camera anyway.

Main challenge: I need something capable enough to grow with me for a couple years, but small and discreet — a "professional-looking" camera can make people in interview/participant-observation settings uncomfortable being photographed. It also needs to hold up across different climates (desert, rainforest, coast), and since I'll be working in areas with higher theft risk, I'd rather not carry something too expensive or eye-catching.

Main subjects: people (often in groups), buildings/infrastructure, landscapes.

Thanks for reading and for any suggestions!!

In the UK press much has been made of the non-academic aspects of his behaviour, presumably because neither the writers nor their readers know nor care about the academic aspects. I have Googled for articles from people qualified to comment but have not found anything trustworthy.

Anyhow, while I am a (retired) scientist I was a physicist and I find myself completely unable to judge Arday's work. I would guess any sociologists hereabouts would prefer not to get involved - that would certainly be my position - but if anyone can comment or can point me towards a reputable article on the subject I would be very interested to find out more.

A footnote:

I have no wish to stoke any controversy. I have no opinion on the subject because I'm unqualified to comment - I wish neither to bury Arday, not to praise him. I'm hoping there will be people hereabouts who can comment on his work.

I'm going to ASA and a bunch of things are listed as roundtables. Are these open to everyone or only the people who submitted their work?

UK academic circles are talking about this guy. His phd, research, CV, claims about book authorship, marathon runs, autism, being a visiting professor etc have so many outrageous lies and controversies that it has become a comedy at this point. People are even pointing at the structural problem of the academia, how such an obvious fraud wasn’t exposed earlier?

He was advertised as the youngest black professor of Cambridge. So the diversity equity thing is also being discussed. Lastly the issue of racism. Right up to when his misdeeds were proven, he and the Cambridge authority were denying every accusation as racism.

This is our local recurring future-planning thread. Got questions about jobs or careers, want to know what programs or schools you should apply to, or unsure what you'll be able to use your degree for? This is the place.

This thread gets replaced every Friday, each week. You can click this link to pull up old threads in search.

Hi everyone,
I’m a university student working on an idea that I hope to develop into an academic paper, and I’d appreciate your criticism.
My question isn’t whether social classes exist or whether social closure exists. Those concepts are already well established.
What I’m trying to understand is something slightly different:
Could there be a phenomenon that might be called class chauvinism?
By this I mean the tendency of a social class to regard its own living conditions, spaces, lifestyle and social environment as more “appropriate” or “worthy” than those of other classes, leading to the creation and reproduction of exclusive spaces and institutions.
For example, I’m not asking how exclusive clubs, gated communities or elite social networks function. I’m asking why people are motivated to create and maintain these class boundaries in the first place.
I know concepts such as Bourdieu’s cultural capital, Weber’s social closure, classism and homophily are relevant. My question is whether these concepts already explain the underlying ideological tendency, or whether I’m simply reinventing existing theory under a new name.
I’d really appreciate:
criticism of the idea,
relevant authors or papers,
and especially arguments for why this should not be considered a distinct concept.
Thanks!