{"id":175,"date":"2025-10-14T09:17:00","date_gmt":"2025-10-14T09:17:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/sociologyofeverydaylife\/?post_type=content&p=175"},"modified":"2025-10-15T08:40:22","modified_gmt":"2025-10-15T08:40:22","slug":"chapter-2","status":"publish","type":"content","link":"https:\/\/staging.routledgelearning.com\/sociologyofeverydaylife\/students\/chapter-2\/","title":{"rendered":"Chapter 2 \u2013 You are What You Eat: Culture, Norms, and Values"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n\tHome<\/a>\n<\/span>\u203a<\/span>\n\tStudents<\/a>\n<\/span>\u203a<\/span>\n\tChapter 2 \u2013 You are What You Eat: Culture, Norms, and Values\n<\/span><\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Chapter 2 \u2013 You are What You Eat: Culture, Norms, and Values<\/h1>\n\n\n
\n\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n\n \n \n <\/media-poster>\n\n <\/media-provider>\n <\/media-video-layout>\n \n <\/media-controls-group>\n <\/media-controls>\n<\/media-player><\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

Chapter Summary<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

In every culture, people have to eat and drink to survive. Making food choices is particularly complex in contemporary consumer culture, where we are surrounded by food basics like rice, milk, and chicken, as well as branded food delights like \u201cFlamin\u2019 Hot Cool Ranch\u201d Doritos, XXX A\u00e7ai-Blueberry-Pomegranate Vitamin Water, and Frosted Red Velvet Pop Tarts. In this chapter, we will examine how the everyday practice of eating and drinking is profoundly social and sociological. Using food as a focal point allows us to understand different theoretical perspectives within sociology: Marxism and commodity fetishism, Durkheim\u2019s perspective on food as totem, and feminist perspectives on foodwork in the home. By seeing food as more than a biological necessity, you will also come to see how food is a form of culture. We explore how our food choices and tastes relate to collective norms and values, how departures from collective norms and values result in deviance, and how such judgments illustrate contrasting concepts of ethnocentrism and cultural relativism.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
\n

Further Reading<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Anderson, Benjamin. 2021. \u201cThe Forgotten Labour of Craft: Exploitation and Organizing in Artisanal Industries.\u201d Labour \/ Le Travail<\/em> 88. doi: 10.52975\/llt.2021v88.0005<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Do craft industries help workers escape exploitation and the illusion of products being disconnected from labor (commodity fetishism)? Recently, artisanal businesses like craft breweries and bakeries have been praised for being small, community-focused, and eco-friendly. However, Anderson (2021) argues that these industries might still conceal exploitative labor practices by emphasizing the \u201cartisanal\u201d quality of their products, which can distract from the harsh realities of production. At the same time, because of their small scale and focus on local consumption, craft industries have the potential to challenge this illusion.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Discussion questions<\/summary>\n
    \n
  • In what ways do craft industries (e.g., craft breweries) reproduce or challenge commodity fetishism?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • How do these industries mirror or differ from Marx\u2019s analysis of class relations under capitalist production?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
  • What difficulties do both producers and consumers face in their efforts to transcend commodity fetishism, i.e., to lessen the gap between the product\u2019s \u201cmystical\u201d appearance and its conditions of production?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

    Opie, Fredrick Douglass. 2008. Hogs and Hominy: Soul Food from Africa to America<\/em>. Columbia University Press.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Frederick Douglass Opie’s Hogs and Hominy: Soul Food from Africa to America<\/em> traces the origins and evolution of African American cuisine from Africa to the United States. The book examines how African culinary traditions were adapted through slavery, emancipation, and the Great Migration, creating the foundation of soul food. Opie emphasizes the role of food in forging a collective identity among African Americans, highlighting how shared culinary practices fostered community and cultural continuity. He shows how limited resources led to the development of a distinct and resilient culinary style. The work also explores the commercialization of soul food and its impact on American cuisine and culture. Overall, Opie illustrates how African American \u201csoul food\u201d serves as a powerful symbol of cultural heritage and identity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

    Discussion questions<\/summary>\n
      \n
    • What role does food play in the formation and maintenance of collective identity among marginalized communities? How do these culinary practices change over time in response to different social, economic, political, and cultural pressures?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • How have the culinary practices of African Americans served as a form of resistance and preservation of cultural identity in the face of social oppression?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • How have socioeconomic factors shaped the development of African American cuisine, and what does this reveal about the intersection of race, class, and food access in the United States?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
    • What does Durkheim\u2019s concept of \u201ctotem\u201d add to our understanding of a culture\u2019s foodways? Where does it fall short?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/details>\n\n\n\n

      Beagan, Brenda, Gwen. E. Chapman, Andrea D\u2019Sylva, and B. Raewyn Bassett. 2008. \u201c`It\u2019s Just Easier for Me to Do It\u2019: Rationalizing the Family Division of Foodwork.\u201d Sociology<\/em> 42(4):653\u201371. doi: 10.1177\/0038038508091621.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Beagan et al.\u2019s study explores how families rationalize the gendered division of food-related tasks. Despite women doing the majority of foodwork, this division is often viewed as fair by both men and women. The study highlights that gender roles are rarely explicitly stated; instead, rationales such as time availability, concern for family health, and the desire to reduce conflict are used. These justifications, although appearing gender-neutral, are deeply rooted in traditional gender expectations. The research includes perspectives from multiple family members across different ethno-cultural groups in Canada, revealing nuanced differences in how foodwork is perceived and justified.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

      Discussion questions<\/summary>\n
        \n
      • How are patriarchal divisions of household labour maintained in foodwork, even in the context of egalitarian gender ideals? How does the notion of ‘choice’ in justifying foodwork responsibilities obscure underlying gender inequalities?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • In what ways do different ethno-cultural backgrounds influence the perceived fairness and rationale behind the division of foodwork within families?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • To what extent does the desire to reduce family conflict impact women’s willingness to engage in the majority of foodwork, and how does this reflect broader societal expectations of women\u2019s roles in the family?<\/li>\n\n\n\n
      • What kinds of social changes might be necessary to achieve a more equitable division of social reproductive labour?<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/details>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
        \n\n\n\n
        \n

        Quizzes<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

        Test your knowledge with the Chapter 2 quizzes!<\/p>\n\n\n\n

        \n
        \n

        Quiz<\/h3>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n