SumBlog11

           Dorothy Smith was an important social thinker who came up with the ideas of Standpoint theory and "Bifuricated Consciousness." Both of these have helped the field in understanding sociology itself and how we collect and interpret data. Standpoint theory says that we can better understand a situation, group or culture by immersing ourselves in it. Instead of researchers looking outwardly, they can get better insight when part of the culture over an extended time. Nuances are seen; deeper meaning derived. Smith says that even gender is a culture on its own which can be misunderstood in an androcentric world. Woman's standpoint theory posits that it can be advantageous for women to give insight since women are a minority and see things as they really are (as opposed to a man in an androcentric culture.)
          This kind of ethnographic approach could be applied when we look at women in power positions in the workforce. There seems to be a double-standard for how women and man should act in their top position. 98% of CEOs are men - in this domination, it would be useful to use women's standpoint theory to better understand the culture 1) from a woman's perspective and 2) when the CEO is a woman.  One powerful woman comes to mind - Anna Wintour.
         Anna Wintour is the Editor-in-Chief at American Vogue; however, she is more than that. She is so influential that people have said all trends in fashion originate with her. She dictates every seasons' fabrics, colors, hemlines and accessories. Top designers at fashion houses have said that a simple purse of her lips at your fashion show means you're out of business. She is THE authority on fashion. There is even a mainstream movie supposedly based on her: The Devil Wears Prada. That being said, she has a reputation for being an "ice queen." She doesn't often offer hints to her personal life or do in-depth personal interviews. This makes me think that a proper ethnographic study of her would provide a better understanding of the culture she's in. I think we could grasp more about her identity. Here is more about her and trying to understand her as powerful CEO and as a woman in the fashion industry:

SumBlog10

          A symbol that I encounter on a daily basis is the handicapped symbol. It is a stick figure of a person in his/her wheelchair. Often it is white on a dark background (usually a blue.) Of course, this a profane sign in that it show a person in a wheelchair; but it's also sacred. It represents someone who is disabled and indicates that special considerations have been made to accommodate them in that space. It means that a person with a disability can use that space or facility often more easily than a non-handicapped marked space. It also means that those who are not disabled should not use that space but leave it reserved for someone with a disability.

          People continue to maintain the stick figure as "sacred" I think for a few reasons. I think one of the big reasons is that in many countries, it is government enforced on the street. For example, a person can be fined for using a handicapped parking stall without the visible documentation. But what about bathrooms and other spaces marked with the symbol? I think the other reasons people obey these symbols is out of respect and conditioning. I think non-disabled individuals over time are conditioned to reserve this space for others. Even when those who don't need the special accommodations, use a handicapped space I think usually feel guilty or feel the need to justify their decision.

          Sociologist Berger would agree with the notion that people get used to this sign and simply obey it. There isn't really a need to keep repeating the process step-by-step. While young children might question an adult why we can't park there or use that particular space, the children will begin to recognize this symbol throughout their daily lives and continue to live with them over time.

          I think this symbol is great for showing our respect and inclusion of disabled people. An advantage is that without words, nearly every culture can understand the picture. The meaning of "accessibility" or "reserved" may need to be learned/taught; but thereafter the symbol is easily applied to all spaces intended. Someone seeing the sign over a parking space in Canada and someone seeing it on a seat in the metro in Japan both know the intended meaning. On the other hand, although it's an attempt at inclusion and helpfulness, by nature it's also one of segregation. 

       On a side note -- recently there has been a movement to change the sign to a more active disabled stick figure. New York city has already embraced it, and it's replacing the old sign. To me, the figure is more athletic and able. What do you think?

SumBlog9

Erving Goffman's ideas of the "presentation of self" are very intriguing to me. Goffman likens our lives to the theater; we are the performers on a stage. There can be multiple performers, performances and stages as well as props. He says that we give ourselves a "self label" which is an identity that we represent. This gives power to the individual, rather than solely to society. In our theater, there is also the audience (or others) and they have expectations of each of the performers and their roles. We can try to understand culture better by studying individual's performances, roles and the stage. Goffman's theatrical metaphor was important to the fields of sociology and communication because it made identity more tangible through an idea almost everyone knows (the theater) and it gave power to individual roles without losing sight of the culture as a whole or the "audience". Despite this, the performance metaphor is also weak because of its simplicity.
         A few examples of performance as culture come to mind for me. For example, I think law enforcement officers are a good example. They assume a role of authority and have a huge audience critiquing them. Even if his or her backstage or off-stage self is quite different, the officer role must be performed while on duty and in the public eye.
      I just watched an episode of the TV series Frasier that I think also applies to the presentation of self idea of Goffman. In this clip, Frasier and his brother, both sophisticated psychiatrists, find themselves on the wrong stage. They are refined men who dress well, have an eye for taste and would choose to go to an antiques store or wine tasting instead of a sporting event. Put them on the "wrong" stage and they could seem (stereo-typically) homosexual. In a case of mixed identities... see the clip below (skip ahead to about the 2:00 min mark):