Social Structures

Essay Outline

Part 1: Social Structures

1. Definition of Social structures:

1.  In sociology, social structure can is distinctive, and institutions’ stable arrangements whereby people in the society live together and interact with one another.
2. Sometimes, social structure refers to patterned social relations, that is, those repetitive and regular interactions between particular social entity’s members.

1. Social structure complexities:

1. Polity
2. State
3. Society

1. Patriarchy:

1. The structure of this type of community depends on binary gender notions, with women on the bottom and men on top. Usually, men are always viewed as superior beings as compared to women.

1. Everyone is equal and should be treated with equal dignity and shown the same respect. Equality is mandatory to ensure social stability; everyone deserves equal rights.

Part 2: Economic Inequality

1. Sociological explanation
2. Individualistic explanation

Part 3: Use of imagery/ messages by media

1. According to Chomsky, the most effective way to control people in developed democracies is by controlling their minds.
2. However, there are many issues associated with the media. Most of the times, the media serves large corporations who work with them to form power structure at the top and end up dominating the private sector.

Part 4: Similarities and differences between larger-scale movement activism, peer education and everyday existence

1. Social movement activism
2. Pee education

• Everyday resistance.

Social structures

In sociology, social structure can is distinctive, and institutions’ stable arrangements whereby people in the society live together and interact with one another. The social structure usually interconnects with the social change concept, which is basically about the forces that lead to changes in the social structure as well as the society’s organization. In general, the social structure has social structure regularities, and its application is not consistent. For instance, the term social structure is misused sometimes when other terms like norm, role, tradition, or custom could best fit (Murdock, 1949).

Social structure studies have attempted to explain certain concepts such as integration as well as trends in inequality. In the study of social structure, sociologists have studied and analyzed rates of birth or crime, social categories, for instance, age group, or organizations. This particular approach refers to formal sociology; however, it does not refer t interpersonal interaction or behaviour of individuals directly. Therefore, social structure study is usually not a behavioural science because its study analysis is often too abstract. Although the phenomena studied in the social structure is as a result of human beings interacting with each other as well as the interaction with their environment, the analysis is usually done and acquired from concrete human behaviour consideration. Researchers who study social structure follow the observational approach to epistemology, methodology, and research (Murdock, 1949).

Social structure complexities

            Social complexity refers to the study of human existence phenomena, that is, natural disasters, marriage practices, political movements, armed conflicts, and emigration patterns, and the numerous other possible relationships between the events (Martin, 2009). In other words, social complexity is a reflection of the behaviour of humans, which are day to day activities and increasingly broader and more complicated situations of the group and individual existence. Social structure complexities include:

1. Polity – this is an adaptive system that is complex and constitutes a government system and society which manages common problems affecting society members in the ordinary history course. Usually, common issues are handled through the government, which prepares, implements, and monitors public policies.
2. State – state is a polity that contains ranked and stratified society such as commoners, military, traders, civil servants, and elite members. Similarly, the state consist of a government system that is composed of differentiated and specialized institutions with reliable control over its territory, together with its resources, capacity to conduct tax collection as government revenue, and the authoritative making of a decision.
3. Society – society refers to a group of people who interact through social relations have one or more common identities. Society attributes include wealth, stratification, authorities, identities, composition, location, size, and related distributions and statistics (Murdock, 1949).

Patriarchy

Patriarchy is an example of a social structure that is common all over the world. The construction of the patriarchy base on binary gender notions, with women on the bottom and men on top. Usually, men are viewed as superior beings as compared to women. Men have various privileges and enjoy prestigious positions in society, including high valued job positions. Men are usually respected and dignified in the community and are also considered the head of the family. They are responsible for protecting the family, that is, the mother and the children, provide food for the family, and take care of any arising issues. On the other hand, women are just co-partnering with men to protect the children. Women are usually oppressed and viewed as caretakers and child-bearers. In some communities, women do not work, but rather stay at home and take care of the children and family. The primary responsibilities of women are to bear children, take care of family, and cook (Walby, 1989).

In more extreme this system’s manifestation, men are the owners of a vast bulk of property while women are understood to merge with men in marriage upon which all the property she owns would after that become his. In this social organization system, women do not have voting rights, and even the children from the marriage are understood to belong to the man and also given the man’s last name. Men and not women hold all the authority and power in society. During this time, such type of system was viewed as the only approach to ensure social stability even though it was unjust and cruel. Before the Civil war, the patriarchal social system existed in the southern American plantation where white men were on top, followed by white women. During this time, it was believed that society would function smoothly if everyone gladly accepted their position in society. As in many patriarchal systems, those in lower classes tended to rebel against their lack of privilege (Walby, 1989).

Economic Inequality

Sociological explanation

According to Marx, poverty and inequality are as a result of the mode of production in the capitalist system: Inegalitarian social structures are necessarily produced by capitalism. Capitalism creates new modes of communication, production, and distribution which produces huge amounts of wealth; however, all the wealth is virtually owned by 10% of the population with the other 90% of the population owning nothing. Usually, inequality passes from one generation to another through an environment of opportunities and services surrounding every person. According to the German philosopher, capitalism is unjust and concentrates more wealth on a few numbers of people, whereas impoverishing the majority of people in society. Such inequality extremes are not good for the overall health of the economy. Severe income inequality would cripple the growth and development of a country (Peet, 1975).

Individualistic explanation

There is a wide belief that individualistic communities are highly likely to experience higher income inequality levels. Generally, individualistic societies emphasize on favouring minimal interference by government, award social status for achievement, and personal freedom as compared to more collectivist societies that emphasize on tradition, loyalty, conformity, as well as putting more value to government intervention. However, certain studies have suggested that communities that promote more individualistic values tend to have lower net income inequality (Peet, 1975).

Use of imagery/ messages by media

The media uses a collection of messages, sounds and imagery to develop reality. According to Chomsky, the most effective way to control people in advanced democracies is by controlling their minds. Chomsky strongly believes that the media has played a big part in the indoctrination system as well as educational institutions. The indoctrination system is the system that teaches us what to think and how to behave; these are the things we can learn if we follow the media and try to understand its structure. Just like the other structures, the media structure produces business elites and intellectual that offer support to the interest of influential individuals and groups. Therefore, the media uses its instruments and mechanism to control society and ensures that society produces responsible individuals. According to Walter Lippman, responsible individuals refer to those that possess absolute power, participate in politics actively, control passive observers, deeply convinced, and negotiate candidates for election. In a real sense, these types of people are the ones that construct social reality as well as everyday reality. The dictatorship of reality is introduced and implemented by these responsible people (Gamson et al., 1992).

However, there are many issues associated with the media. Most of the times, the media serves large corporations who work with them to form power structure at the top and end up dominating the private sector. In turn, a worldwide pyramid of power is developed, and reality is created and imposed. For instance, a newspaper owned by some large corporation will select which type of information reaches the public and block other information from reaching the public. Elite system of education and its socializing role suggest that particular things are not acceptable and others that should not be talked about; if this is not followed then one may find himself out of the system that guides and protects (Gamson et al., 1992).

Similarities and differences between larger-scale movement activism, peer education and everyday existence

Social movements refer to a group of people who brought together by a shared interest in either instigating or stopping social change. The primary purpose of social movement is to focus on particular social or political issues and advocate for specific social change; however, they can as well organize and oppose social change that does not meet their needs. Examples of social movements include civil rights movement, the abolition of slavery, animal rights, anti-poverty, disability movement, the anti-apartheid, peace movement, environmental movement, and votes for women (Wilson, 1973). On the other hand, the purpose of peer education is to influence people’s behaviours, beliefs, attitude, and knowledge. In many circumstances, peer education is applied in the case of reproductive and health promotion, prevention of blood-borne viruses and sexually transmitted infections, and alcohol or other drug education. Examples of peer education programs include: Holroyd peer education program for depression, SPEEK program, and talking reality for young parenting (Damon, 1984). Lastly, everyday resistance consists of flight, sabotage, arson, slander, feigned ignorance, desertion, pilfering, non-compliance, and foot-dragging with the main aim of opposing oppression (Wade, 1997).

Various social movements use different tactics to convey their messages. Some tactics include mass demonstrations against administrative practices, boycotting, protests, verbal appeals, hangings in effigy, a combination of protests and appeals, use of force, and threats. On the other hand, peer education can be done by carrying out gender and cultural sensitivity, family support groups, using negotiation and mediation skills with family. Lastly, tactics in everyday resistance include flight, sabotage, arson, slander, feigned ignorance, desertion, pilfering, non-compliance, and foot-dragging (Wade, 1997).

References

Damon, W. (1984). Peer education: The untapped potential. Journal of applied developmental psychology, 5(4), 331-343.

Gamson, W. A., Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media images and the social construction of reality. Annual review of sociology, 18(1), 373-393.

Martin, J. L. (2009). Social structures. Princeton University Press.

Murdock, G. P. (1949). Social structure.

Peet, R. (1975). Inequality and poverty: a Marxist-geographic theory. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 65(4), 564-571.

Wade, A. (1997). Small acts of living: Everyday resistance to violence and other forms of oppression. Contemporary family therapy, 19(1), 23-39.

Walby, S. (1989). Theorizing patriarchy. Sociology, 23(2), 213-234.

Wilson, J. (1973). Introduction to social movements (p. 233). New York: Basic Books.