Week 1
Chapter 1: The social problems process
Two ways to define social problems:
1. Social problems as harmful conditions: The objectivist outlook
The usual way is to define social problems as conditions that somehow harm society: a social
problem is a social condition or pattern of behavior that has negative consequences for individuals,
our social world, or our physical world. This approach is called objectivist because it tries to couch the
definition in terms of objectively measurable characteristics of conditions. However, there are some
difficulties with making an objective definition of social problems that can distinguish between the
things that people consider social problems and what they do not:
Conditions that might be deemed harmful aren’t always identified as social problems: racism,
sexism, and heightism all have comparable effects on society, as social problems these three
forms of discrimination have not received anything like the same degree of attention. The
different treatment makes it difficult to argue that there is an evenly applied objective
standard for identifying what is or is not a social problem.
The same condition may be identified as a social problem for very different reasons: people
disagree about why a certain condition is harmful. For instance, obesity is a social problem
because it leads to discrimination or because it harms individuals and is a drain on societal
resources. Very different (even contradictory) objective standards may be used in identifying
a condition as a social problem.
Our list of social problems includes widely diverse phenomena. Any objective definition that
tries to cover a broad range of topics must be vague and speak in only the most general
terms about harm, undermining well-being, or anything else.
2. Social problems as topics of concern: The subjectivist outlook
The subjectivist approach defines social problems in terms of people’s subjective sense that
something is or is not a problem (in some societies sexism is (not) a problem). There is no objective
standard whether a condition is a social problem. Therefore, social problems should not be viewed as
a type of social condition, but as a process of responding to social conditions: the activities of
individuals or groups making assertions of grievance and claims with respect to some putative
conditions (not about conditions, but claims about conditions). Thinking systematically about social
problems requires adopting a subjectivist approach that focuses on the process by which people
identify social problems. That process involves what sociologists call social construction.
Social construction
By social construction, we mean the way people assign meaning to the world, mostly by using
language. Language is flexible: as people learn new things about the world, they devise words with
new meanings. In this way, people continually create - or construct - fresh understandings about the
world around them. Because this is a social process, sociologists refer to it as social construction.
Once we recognize that social problems are social constructions, and that what the conditions
constructed as social problems have in common is precisely that construction, then it becomes
apparent that social problems should be understood in terms of a social problems process. That is,
the study of social problems should focus on how and why particular conditions come to be
constructed as social problems. This approach is called constructionist (the perspective adopted in
this book).
The basic framework
Constructing a social problem involves a process of claimsmaking: someone (claimsmakers, i.e.
activists or experts) must bring the topic to the attention of others, by making a claim that there is a
condition that should be recognized as troubling. The social problem process requires not only that
someone make a claim, but that others react to it. There is a difference between claims and the
Chapter 1: The social problems process
Two ways to define social problems:
1. Social problems as harmful conditions: The objectivist outlook
The usual way is to define social problems as conditions that somehow harm society: a social
problem is a social condition or pattern of behavior that has negative consequences for individuals,
our social world, or our physical world. This approach is called objectivist because it tries to couch the
definition in terms of objectively measurable characteristics of conditions. However, there are some
difficulties with making an objective definition of social problems that can distinguish between the
things that people consider social problems and what they do not:
Conditions that might be deemed harmful aren’t always identified as social problems: racism,
sexism, and heightism all have comparable effects on society, as social problems these three
forms of discrimination have not received anything like the same degree of attention. The
different treatment makes it difficult to argue that there is an evenly applied objective
standard for identifying what is or is not a social problem.
The same condition may be identified as a social problem for very different reasons: people
disagree about why a certain condition is harmful. For instance, obesity is a social problem
because it leads to discrimination or because it harms individuals and is a drain on societal
resources. Very different (even contradictory) objective standards may be used in identifying
a condition as a social problem.
Our list of social problems includes widely diverse phenomena. Any objective definition that
tries to cover a broad range of topics must be vague and speak in only the most general
terms about harm, undermining well-being, or anything else.
2. Social problems as topics of concern: The subjectivist outlook
The subjectivist approach defines social problems in terms of people’s subjective sense that
something is or is not a problem (in some societies sexism is (not) a problem). There is no objective
standard whether a condition is a social problem. Therefore, social problems should not be viewed as
a type of social condition, but as a process of responding to social conditions: the activities of
individuals or groups making assertions of grievance and claims with respect to some putative
conditions (not about conditions, but claims about conditions). Thinking systematically about social
problems requires adopting a subjectivist approach that focuses on the process by which people
identify social problems. That process involves what sociologists call social construction.
Social construction
By social construction, we mean the way people assign meaning to the world, mostly by using
language. Language is flexible: as people learn new things about the world, they devise words with
new meanings. In this way, people continually create - or construct - fresh understandings about the
world around them. Because this is a social process, sociologists refer to it as social construction.
Once we recognize that social problems are social constructions, and that what the conditions
constructed as social problems have in common is precisely that construction, then it becomes
apparent that social problems should be understood in terms of a social problems process. That is,
the study of social problems should focus on how and why particular conditions come to be
constructed as social problems. This approach is called constructionist (the perspective adopted in
this book).
The basic framework
Constructing a social problem involves a process of claimsmaking: someone (claimsmakers, i.e.
activists or experts) must bring the topic to the attention of others, by making a claim that there is a
condition that should be recognized as troubling. The social problem process requires not only that
someone make a claim, but that others react to it. There is a difference between claims and the
