Stephen Turner’s rich and informative history navigates the complex and changing landscape of American Sociology. He discusses how political, social, and academic conditions enabled varying forms of sociology and what epistemological and methodological impacts these conditions had on different schools of sociology. Turner’s book asks readers to reflect on what sociology is and what place elite and nonelite sociology should have in the discipline. Turner emphasizes the role of feminist sociology and “activist scholarship,” arguing that current sociology is one where we have in part returned to our early 20th century reformist roots. This paper expands Turner’s conversation about the contributions of feminist sociology. I offer this critique to function as an entry point through which to contemplate what elite sociology is, and how it relates to feminist sociology. I argue that Turner under-explores the contributions of feminist sociology by reducing its contributions to advocacy-based scholarship. By placing feminist sociology in opposition to elite sociology, he simplifies the important discussion of elite sociology, and loses sight of feminist sociology’s theoretical and methodological strengths. Highlighting aspects of intersectional theory and institutional ethnography, I argue that new elites have emerged in opposition, contrast, and conjunction to the elite that Turner describes, and I hope to further a dialogue on what constitutes “elite” sociology.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price includes VAT for USA
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.
Albert, K. (2014). Erasing the social from social science: The intellectual costs of boundary-work and the Canadian institute of health research. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 39(3), 393–420.
Choo, H. Y., & Ferree, M. M. (2010). Practicing intersectionality in sociological research: A critical analysis of inclusions, interactions, and institutions in the study of inequalities. Sociological Theory, 28(2), 129–149.
Collins, P. H. (1990). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness and the politics of empowerment. New York: Routledge.
Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexity of intersectionality. Signs, 30(3), 1771–1800.
Naples, N. A. (2013). Sustaining democracy: Localization, globalization, and feminist praxis. Sociological Forum, 28(4), 657–681.
Smith, D. E. (2005). Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Lanham: Altamira Press.
Turner, S. (2013). American sociology: From pre-disciplinary to post-normal. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Yuval-Davis, N. (2006). Intersectionality and feminist politics. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 13, 193–209.
Zinn, M. B., & Dill, B. T. (1996). Theorizing difference from multiracial feminism. Feminist Studies, 22(2), 321–331.
I would like to thank Stephen Turner for inviting me to critically reflect on his book and the history he presents. I also thank Linda Derksen, Neil McLaughlin, Hae Yeon Choo, and Zaheer Baber for their very helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper. All errors remain mine.
About this article
Cite this article
Albert, K. Towards a New Normal: Emergent Elites and Feminist Scholarship. Am Soc 46, 29–39 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-014-9243-8
- Feminist sociology
- Institutional ethnography
- Sociologists for women in society
- Elite sociology