There’s great negativity that is spread toward the feminist’s position on the inequality of the world. However, Sprague’s article “Holy Men and Big Guns,” undoubtedly sheds light a very disregarded social issue - the institutional mistreatment of a specific group of people and people in general. All due to the outdated concepts that evolved from the brainchildren of falling, old white male theorists.
The author of the article, Joey Sprague makes a bold and intriguing statement on the collective feminist standpoint of the primitive ideals of how a society should functioned and be governed as dictated by the white, canonized noblemen of the Old World. Sprague states,“ social theory has not just distorted social perception, it is becoming functionally irrelevant in contemporary social life (Sprague, pg. 88, 1997).” My perception of Sprague’s statement is that very much like a popular domestic electronic device or household appliance products, the ideal of societal functionalism can fall apart, wear out, or simply become obsolete to the modern world of a given period and its zeitgeist.
Another good example would be a 3- level house built in the 1950’s. The conditions overtime will sustain the first several years to the first decade with little or no need for repair. However, after decades of enduring a variety of different seasonal conditions the materials that provide a unique purpose of the home’s structure will become weathered or require maintenance. The 1950’s house could also become obsolete due to the individual needs of families/ future homeowners or a redevelopment of the neighborhood leaving the old house to be more prone to remodeling or demolition.
The point I was making with the two examples (domestic products, house) is everything tangible and intangible are subject to be or become functionally flawed. Nothing in this world, not even the most abstract or concrete ideas can withstand the test of time and survive without falling prey to a new and more efficient ideal, methodology, or perspective. And that outlook is where I will tie back into essentially the one of the core feminist theories Sprague’s proposed in challenging the functional inefficiency and biases of a dated societal infrastructure.
The flagship of Sprague’s feminist argument revolved around the dire need for readjustment of the sociological canon by challenging the ideological, ethnic, and gender qualifications of the individuals inducted into the prestigious assemblage. The hypocrisy of the sociological canon is illuminated with observation Sprague obtained and states, “The metatheoretical message is that these ideas/thinkers are universal and ahistorical, independent of the social circumstances from which they originated. (Sprague, pg. 89, 1997).”
After introducing the hypocrisy and obsolete methodology of the sociological canon, Sprague purposed a bright yet common-sensed thought that should run through everyone’s mind in order to rectify the mistakes of sociological forefathers. The best way to do so, once again fairly obvious and common-sensed is to broaden the scope of first-hand sociological insight, interpretation, and overall integrity of the field of sociology. The first step toward rectification of the sociological canon is to reevaluate society and the context of today’s issues, growing concerns of tomorrow, and the acknowledgment of the brilliant, up and coming social-theorists who may find new perspectives on the diversity experiences each one of us take in while on this earth.
The reason why Sprague is so passionate on the topic of reconfiguring the sociological canon and aggressively calling for reformation is because she recognizes that abstract individuation is still a major component with sociological research that dates all the way through the canon’s line of prestigious sociologists. While reading Sprague’s article, her distress of the continuation of are analyzed as to different entities that have no correlation, no effect, or repercussions toward one another.
That sociological ignorance stems from the blindness of the “old, white men” theorists of yore who biasedly believed regardless of skin color or income level, everyone lived lives with commonly-shared experiences. Which if the course of history has taught us anything, it is that not one person lives the same exact experiences as the person down the block, the next city,state, or country, etc. It is true groups of people in a given area will have certain things in common but not all, because each person’s life is unique filled with a multitude and variety of positive and negative events that define their lives.
That is why Sprague implies in the article, that the sociological canon’s structure is rotting at the core and must be chopped down and rebuilt with the aid of sociologists of every country, given area, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and regardless of gender. If these intelligent minds are allowed to be recognized for their theoretical contributions, be published, and canonized in sociology then the future of humanity has a grand opportunity to diverse voices of the world to finally be heard and work toward a more utopian world greater than Marx could ever imagine.
The author of the article, Joey Sprague makes a bold and intriguing statement on the collective feminist standpoint of the primitive ideals of how a society should functioned and be governed as dictated by the white, canonized noblemen of the Old World. Sprague states,“ social theory has not just distorted social perception, it is becoming functionally irrelevant in contemporary social life (Sprague, pg. 88, 1997).” My perception of Sprague’s statement is that very much like a popular domestic electronic device or household appliance products, the ideal of societal functionalism can fall apart, wear out, or simply become obsolete to the modern world of a given period and its zeitgeist.
Another good example would be a 3- level house built in the 1950’s. The conditions overtime will sustain the first several years to the first decade with little or no need for repair. However, after decades of enduring a variety of different seasonal conditions the materials that provide a unique purpose of the home’s structure will become weathered or require maintenance. The 1950’s house could also become obsolete due to the individual needs of families/ future homeowners or a redevelopment of the neighborhood leaving the old house to be more prone to remodeling or demolition.
The point I was making with the two examples (domestic products, house) is everything tangible and intangible are subject to be or become functionally flawed. Nothing in this world, not even the most abstract or concrete ideas can withstand the test of time and survive without falling prey to a new and more efficient ideal, methodology, or perspective. And that outlook is where I will tie back into essentially the one of the core feminist theories Sprague’s proposed in challenging the functional inefficiency and biases of a dated societal infrastructure.
The flagship of Sprague’s feminist argument revolved around the dire need for readjustment of the sociological canon by challenging the ideological, ethnic, and gender qualifications of the individuals inducted into the prestigious assemblage. The hypocrisy of the sociological canon is illuminated with observation Sprague obtained and states, “The metatheoretical message is that these ideas/thinkers are universal and ahistorical, independent of the social circumstances from which they originated. (Sprague, pg. 89, 1997).”
After introducing the hypocrisy and obsolete methodology of the sociological canon, Sprague purposed a bright yet common-sensed thought that should run through everyone’s mind in order to rectify the mistakes of sociological forefathers. The best way to do so, once again fairly obvious and common-sensed is to broaden the scope of first-hand sociological insight, interpretation, and overall integrity of the field of sociology. The first step toward rectification of the sociological canon is to reevaluate society and the context of today’s issues, growing concerns of tomorrow, and the acknowledgment of the brilliant, up and coming social-theorists who may find new perspectives on the diversity experiences each one of us take in while on this earth.
The reason why Sprague is so passionate on the topic of reconfiguring the sociological canon and aggressively calling for reformation is because she recognizes that abstract individuation is still a major component with sociological research that dates all the way through the canon’s line of prestigious sociologists. While reading Sprague’s article, her distress of the continuation of are analyzed as to different entities that have no correlation, no effect, or repercussions toward one another.
That sociological ignorance stems from the blindness of the “old, white men” theorists of yore who biasedly believed regardless of skin color or income level, everyone lived lives with commonly-shared experiences. Which if the course of history has taught us anything, it is that not one person lives the same exact experiences as the person down the block, the next city,state, or country, etc. It is true groups of people in a given area will have certain things in common but not all, because each person’s life is unique filled with a multitude and variety of positive and negative events that define their lives.
That is why Sprague implies in the article, that the sociological canon’s structure is rotting at the core and must be chopped down and rebuilt with the aid of sociologists of every country, given area, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and regardless of gender. If these intelligent minds are allowed to be recognized for their theoretical contributions, be published, and canonized in sociology then the future of humanity has a grand opportunity to diverse voices of the world to finally be heard and work toward a more utopian world greater than Marx could ever imagine.