either way, sociology disses the yankees

Social Psychology Quarterly is the only ASA journal with the good visual and business sense to have a changing photograph on its cover. Now it’s taken this innovation to the next step by sponsoring a vote on the cover for an upcoming issue. My first reaction upon seeing the options was, “Hey, it’s old-school evolutionary psychology [option #2] versus new-school evolutionary psychology [option #1],” but I realize I am largely idiosyncratic within sociology in this respect. My second reaction was “Hey, I wonder if there could be a vote about the semantic vitality of ‘gendered’ as an adjective,” but I realize I am largely idiosyncratic within sociology in this respect as well.

Non sequitur: No Internet in my apartment yet. I am surviving, although I am gaining weight from the place that serves up chocolate-and-peanut-butter malts with free Wi-Fi across the street.

Author: jeremy

I am the Ethel and John Lindgren Professor of Sociology and a Faculty Fellow in the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University.

11 thoughts on “either way, sociology disses the yankees”

  1. I normally think of “fandom” as something more like Star Trek than Yankees. I didn’t think about what the Johnny on the T-Shirt meant, but you’re obviously right.

    Like

  2. I’d say if #2 wins, somebody’s gonna have some ‘splaining to do (yikes, I just checked; it’s close!). I’ll definitely be interested to hear the analysis (I haven’t been reading the journal lately, there is an accompanying analysis, right?).

    Like

  3. Is it evil of me to want us all to vote #2 to see what happens with the outrage? Even if they didn’t know better about selecting photos, shouldn’t they know better about internet polls?

    And when I think “gendered fandom,” the image that comes to my mind is a bunch of men–maybe with letters painted on their chests. But maybe the article/discussion is about women fans.

    Like

  4. Is it evil of me to want us all to vote #2 to see what happens with the outrage? Even if they didn’t know better about selecting photos, shouldn’t they know better about internet polls?

    I’m half-tempted to post about it on CT and tell everyone to vote #2 just to see if they’d invalidate the poll on the grounds that it would get everyone in trouble wasn’t scientifically valid.

    [Edited to add strikethrough, so Baby Jesus will stop crying. -Tina]

    Like

  5. I’ll be willfully obtuse, ’cause I know how precious everyone finds that. Isn’t the image in #2 the most common type of image featured on the Sociological Images blog? If a sociology journal is going to have images on its cover, is it outrageous that some proposed images would be like Sociological Images images?

    Like

  6. I have to agree with Jeremy here. I don’t think that by putting that image on the cover SPQ would be promoting anything. Indeed, I suspect (and hope) that it would be part of a social commentary on the mobilization of gendered images to promote certain kinds of fan-dom. And I believe (perhaps falsely, but nonetheless) that the open confrontation of such imagery (as sociological images does) is more powerful than not addressing it.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.