Due to the commercialization of childhood and a pervasive consumer culture, children often measure their success and worth by the materials that they possess. Children are able to be apart of the “conversations” in their school settings by alluding to their material wealth which can be quantified by the toys they own, the extravagance of their birthday parties, and their family vacations. Although the commercialization of childhood affects all families in one way or another, the manifestation of children’s consumer culture in the lives of children and their families is heavily dependent on the social context and intersections between class and race. In the book, Longing and Belonging(2009), Allison Pugh studies the relationship between children, …show more content…
Wright Mills differentiates between trouble and issues. Troubles pertain to the private life of an individual and the problems that occur within their immediate relationships and social settings. Issues, on the other hand, to do with public matters regarding larger social organizations and institutions. (1959: 8) According to Mills, “Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both”(1959: 3). Fundamentally,the private lives of individuals can not be understood if it not placed within the bigger picture of relevant societal structures and institutions like race, class, and gender. This being the case, the “shame” and “triumph”(Pugh 2009: 81) that children feel when they have toys of value within their personal circles at school must also be considered in relation to their greater significance within social institution. In the case of the Oakland children, their materials and ability to engage the conversation regarding their personal lives and belongings signal that they are members of a certain economic background and …show more content…
Robert D. Putnam describes the relationship between the social class of parents and the outcome of their children in the text, Our Kids: The American Dream(2015). He writes, “Even ideal parenting cannot compensate for all the ill effects of poverty on children, and even incompetent parenting cannot nullify all the advantages conferred by parental affluence and education”(Putnam 2015: 134). Accordingly, although Angela, the African American single mother of three, is an “ideal” parent because she has good intentions and invests into her child’s future, the systemic inequality of class does not allow her to make informed and impactful decisions. Thus the disadvantages faced poor children as a result of the poverty of their parents is likely to reproduce itself due to deeply embedded class inequality of their
Velazquez concludes that “from clothes to computers… , no American child is immune from the underlying suggestion that owning these things defines success. While the message of excess materialism is toxic for all our children, it is especially cruel for the one out of six American children living in the poverty” (769). The phrase “no American child” indicates that Velazquez is biased when she discusses large corporations’ influences on children. Her tone suggests that she is against material possessions. She finds them toxic and that is how she draws her comparison to the toxicity of the corporations. This use of rhetoric conveys that Velazquez exaggerates the negative effect of large corporations’ products. She ignores the initial purpose, when these large corporations invent technology, is to make people’s lives more convenient and help people to sort their problems, which can only be done with machines. The location of waste seems like a minor issue in comparison to all the great benefits that come with the products of these large
As much as society tries to deny the fact that the family that one comes from determines their fate, in almost every case this very fact is true. Today, we see how infants who are born into wealthy families are treated differently than children who are born into drug and disease-stricken poverty. Higher classed people stand out in society on both a local and national level much more than the average middle class working family.
He points out the differences between upper class and lower class family life; upper class have more successful marriages and are better prepared the bear children, and so their children are better off than the lower class children (61-79). But his assumptions of the upper class are broad and could be easily disproven by many families across America, and simply having less money does not make lower class families worse than upper class. Putnam then goes into parenting differences across the classes. He states that higher class parents are more likely to spend more money, time, and energy on their children, and thusly are being parented more positively than the lower class who are likely to spend less (109-134). Again, Putnam’s assumptions, while seemingly proven by data, can still be thought of as too broad to that just because upper class have more to spend on their children, that they provide better parenting. Many lower class parents who might be doing an excellent job parenting, even better than some upper class parents, seem to be discredited or overlooked. Putnam’s last few points about the opportunity gap are reflected in the schools (160-190) and communities (206-226). Simply put, due to where they can afford to live and go to school, upper class kids have far more social support and more
In a country like the United States of America, with a history of every individual having an equal opportunity to reach their dreams, it becomes harder and harder to grasp the reality that equal opportunity is diminishing as the years go on. The book Our Kids by Robert Putnam illustrates this reality and compares life during the 1950’s and today’s society and how it has gradually gotten to a point of inequality. In particular, he goes into two touching stories, one that shows the changes in the communities we live in and another that illustrates the change of family structure. In the end he shows how both stories contribute to the American dream slipping away from our hands.
The book Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life published in 2003, takes a close look into the lives of different families in the United States and how they are affected by race and social class and how their family lives differ. The Author, Annette Lareau, discusses how social class affects the parenting styles and how these parenting styles are affecting the children. Although Lareau’s book could use a few changes, it is well written and it is a good read to help better understand how social class and parenting styles can affect the lives of different children on a personal level. In
After reading “Invisible Inequality: Social Class and Childrearing in Black families and White Families,” by Annette Lareau, it was evident that she collected much data from her study of different types of families. In this study with the help of other sociologists, Lareau went into the lives of both black and white middle class and working class/ poor families. In her study she observed the behavior of children at home, school, and in the public eye. She observed the parenting methods the adults chose to use and the child’s reaction to them. Lareau and her team were able to see what influences certain factors such as income, race, family size, home location, schooling, and career choices had on each family and their children. The purpose of this study as well as the central argument is very well addressed by Lareau in the text and leads to many well supported conclusions.
Lichter,Daniel T. and David J. Eggebeen. 1987. “Rich kids, Poor kids: Changing Family Structure and Income Inequality Among American Children.” Paper presented at the annual meetings of the American Sociological Association, 23-27 Aug., Cincinnati, OH. 12 May 2014
In her book, Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life, Annette Lareau argues out that the influences of social class, as well as, race result in unequal childhoods (Lareau 1). However, one could query the inequality of childhood. To understand this, it is necessary to infer from the book and assess the manner in which race and social class tend to shape the life of a family. As the scholar demonstrates, each race and social class usually has its own unique way of child upbringing based on circumstances. To affirm this, the different examples that the scholar presents in the book could be used. Foremost, citing the case of both the White and the African American families, the scholar advances that the broader economics of racial inequality has continued to hamper the educational advancement and blocks access to high-paying jobs with regard to the Blacks as opposed to the Whites. Other researchers have affirmed this where they indicate that the rate of unemployment among the African Americans is twice that of the White Americans. Research further advances that, in contrast to the Whites, for those African Americans who are employed, there is usually a greater chance that they have been underemployed, receive lower wages, as well as, inconsistent employment. This is how the case of unequal childhood based on race comes about; children from the Black families will continue residing in poverty as opposed to those from the white families.
Yes, when thinking about social classes in the Unites States, it is easier to gravitate towards the differences among them. However, through reading about the different families in Unequal Childhoods, there are similarities across social classes. One of the similarities among the middle, working, and poor class is the “absent” of parental involvement. Now, this also depends on how the reader views the situation. For the poor class or working class families, such as Katie Brindle and Tyrec Taylor, their parents left them alone to play on their own. Katie Brindle is a White girl who comes from a poor class family. Tyrec Taylor is a Black boy and is part of working class. Lareau observes, “Most working-class and poor parents did not consider children’s
Swimme, Brian. “How Do Our Kids Get So Caught Up in Consumerism”. The Human Experience: Who Am I?. 8th ed. Winthrop University: Rock Hill SC, 2012. 155-157. Print.
Louie, Vivian. 2001. “Parents’ Aspirations and Investment: The Role of Social Class in the Educational
According to Schwartz-Nobel, America will lose as much as 130 billion in future productive capacity for every year that 14.5 American children continue to live in poverty (Koppelman and Goodhart, 2007). Sadly the seriousness of poverty is still often clouded by myths and misunderstandings by society at large. This essay studies the issue of poverty and classism in today's society.
In Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life, Annette Lareau discussed the extensive amount of research she conducted employing observational and interview techniques. She collected data on the middle class, working class, and poor families. She was trying to understand the impact of a child’s early parental guidance on the child’s life. She was able to conduct this research with 12 families, all of whom had fourth graders. She gathered enough information to conclude the major differences in the parenting styles of each type of family, which was directly correlated to socioeconomic status. Annette Lareau opens her book with two chapters to give the reader an idea on what the examples she gives will detail.
Marketers become rich by selling the idea of happiness to children; that life is all about buying and getting, and money is happiness. This ill treatment of children, by marketers, negatively affects social aspects of children. In more recent years, marketers have started to push more expensive, “branded” products to children. As Velmha La.Point states, “There’s a mantra in American society you are what you have, you are what you buy, you are what you own. The corollary of that, is and if you don’t have it, then you are a nobody”(Consuming Kids). This then leads to things such as depression or low self-esteem if ...
Consumption involves individuals purchasing goods to achieve a meaning or value to the consumer, not simply for the material benefit it offers. Instead, ‘commodities are not just objects of economic exchange, they are goods to think with, goods to speak with’ (Fiske, 1989) (Cited in Bocock, 1993). This suggests that individuals use goods as symbolic props, as a way of creating and moulding their own identities. It is suggested that the individual has the ability to create their own narrative and can rely upon the novelties of consumer goods. However, the individual is still bound by the market and the mass commodities of Capitalism. For example: sports individuals purchase equipment, clothing etc, to encourage the identity they wish to possess. As they see these goods as a connection to their lifestyle.