1. Gilman’s multidimensional explanation of gender inequality
Nonrational A C T I O N
Differential socialization
(internalized attitudes)
Shared symbolic codes
and gender norms
Sex ‘principles’ (biology)
Individual
Collective
ORDER
Patriarchal institutions
Rational

2. Georg Simmel

3. Georg Simmel ( )
Born in 1858 in Berlin, son of successful businessman who died when GS was an infant
Historical context: Berlin at the time was a crossroads of Europe, of western civilization even, a cosmopolitan center
GS was the quintessential Berlin intellectual - tied into intellectual circles, café culture
Marginalized from academic life, due to eclectic nature of work and institutional anti- semitism, as Simmel was Jewish
GS was unable to secure a professorship until the end of his life, at (mediocre) Strasbourg
GS’s marginalized position led to appreciation of social position and its importance in society

4. Intellectual influences & core ideas
Simmel’s work went against two prominent currents of European thought:
Historicsm and Organicism
Historicism emphasizes fundamental differences b/w natural and social worlds
natural sciences seen as the proper domain of objectivity whereas social sciences, if science at all, require interpretive methods, subjectivity
Organicism sees natural & social realities as continuous and models social processes on biological ones
employs organic metaphors, sees world as one chain of being from simple, natural phenomena to the most complex social patterns
archetypal figures: Durkheim, Spencer, Comte
Simmel rejected historicism b/c it precluded scientific and generalizing approach to social life and rejected organicism for its reification of social facts, its vision of life as a thing

5. Society According to Simmel,
“Society is merely the name for number of individuals connected by interaction….It is not a ‘substance,’ nothing concrete, but an event: It is the function of receiving and affecting the fate and development of one individual by another”
In short society is the array of interactions engaged in by individuals

6. Society  Sociation Simmel prefers the term “sociation” over “society”
“Society” is a reification, “sociation” is not
Sociation emphasizes relation and process
Insofar as we speak of “society,” we do so only in shorthand

7. Sociology
Sociology’s goal is description and analysis of particular forms of interaction and their crystallization in group characteristics
Proper subject matter for sociology is the formal aspects of social life, not the particular content
Content refers to the drives, purposes, interests, or inclinations that individuals have for interacting with one another
Such motivations, in themselves, are not social but rather are isolated psychological or biological impulses
Actions in concert with others to fulfill drives or realize interests are social
 a geometry of social life: specifying regularities in diverse content
Emphasizes social interaction at the individual & small group level
Microsociology of Simmel much different from “grand theory” of the classical writers, especially Marx and Durkheim

8. Sociology: against reification
Reification means “thingification,” making something that is a process or a concept, something abstract, into a thing, e.g.
Relationship: when two people become romantically involved, they have a “relationship,” it becomes a thing, tangible force – but really it’s a process of relating
Nation: we assume there’s some “essence,” “Americanness,” but it’s really a way of relating
America, Americans, are constructed through ongoing interaction
Organization: we treat it as a thing rather than a process, a set of relations among people
Class, race, gender, etc.
gender is more tricky b/c there seems to be some kind of biological component, so there might be some “thingness,” some “essence,” to gender

9. Sociology: against categories
“Sociology asks what happens to men and by what rules do they behave not insofar as they form groups and are determined by their group existence in their totalities but insofar as they form groups and are determined by the group existence because of interaction”
Usual tendency is to reduce people to categorical memberships: e.g., women, white, sociologist…
It’s not the individual attributes that are of interest, it’s how they’re instanciated (come into being) through action
The concepts are only realized via interaction
Categorical identities do not determine action, they only exist through action/interaction

10. The individual in modern society
Society and the individuals that compose it constitute an interdependent duality, the existence of one presupposing the other
duality: being twofold; dichotomy; a classification into two opposed parts or subclasses
Urban societies allow individuals to cultivate unique talents and interests but also leads to a tragic “leveling” of the human spirit
Weber observed a similar tendency in bureaucracies
Tragedy of culture: objective culture - the ideas and products of human creativity - comes to dominate individual will and self-development or subjective culture

11. Toward a formal sociology
Diverse social phenomena – content & contexts - can be understood in terms of formal similarities
Analyze all different kings in terms of kingship
Analyze kings and presidents in terms of leadership
Forms of interaction among members of different groups (varied content) are importantly shaped by the structural similarities of those groups
Focus on formal characteristics of social processes allows GS to preserve historicist emphasis on uniqueness of different moments, events and places, while nonetheless seeing underlying uniformities
In other words seeing a structural similarity b/w kingship & presidency is not same as saying all kings and presidents are the same…it allows you to abstract some dimension without losing the content

12. Quantitative features of social life
GS divides the social world into 3 basic forms:
Solitary individual
Dyad (two persons)
each individual can present themselves to the other in a way that maintains their identity
either party can end the relationship by withdrawing from it
Triad (3 or more people)
enables strategies that lead to competition, alliances, or mediation
often develops a group structure independent of the individuals in it, whereas this is less likely in the dyad

13. “Sociability” (1910)
sociability: the “play-form of association,” driven by, "amicability, breeding, cordiality and attractiveness of all kinds"
interacting with others for the sake of the connection itself
Sociable conversations have no significance or ulterior motive, talking is an end in itself
for pure pleasure of association
not that all serious topics must be avoided, but point is that sociability finds its justification, its place, and its purpose only in the functional play of conversation as such

14. Resolving the solitariness of the individual
Every play or artistic activity has a common element: “a feeling for, or a satisfaction in associating with others, resolving the solitariness of the individual into togetherness, union with others”
Depends on “good form,” interaction of the elements through which a unity is made
“Since sociability in its pure form has no ulterior end, no content, and no result outside itself, it is oriented completely about personalities.” (297)
“But personalities must not emphasize themselves too individually…or with too much abandon and aggressiveness”

15. The “superficial” nature of sociability
To the extent that it’s a form of interaction free of the tensions of “real” life, sociability establishes an “artificial” world, a world without friction or conflict
“Inasmuch as sociability is the abstraction of association – an abstraction of the character of art or of play – it demands the purest, most engaging kind of interaction – that among equals….It is game in which one ‘acts’ as though all were equal.” (294)

16. Coquetry
Coquetry or flirtation: a kind of sociability or erotic play in which an actor continuously alternates between denial and consent
Idea is to lead the other on “without letting matters come to a decision, to rebuff him without making him lose all hope”
“Coquetry is the teasing or even ironic play with which eroticism has distilled the pure essence of its interaction out from its substantive or individual content”
It’s not individual behavior, it’s interaction