Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Sociology saves us all

People holding protest signs

University of Houston students protest a Texas bill which would ban diversity programs at public colleges and universities in 2023.

Raquel Natalicchio/Houston Chronicle via Getty Images

Thiele Strong is a sociology professor at San José State University and a public voices fellow at the The OpEd Project.

Across the nation, campaigns to cancel, eliminate and marginalize the basic social science education that underpins diversity, equity and inclusion efforts have gained steam. Educational gag orders and DEI bans impact students from K-12 classrooms to college campuses.

Most central to the ire of those attacking are foundational sociological concepts. Sociology is the field which studies society. Sociologists analyze life chances and how we get them; how structures pattern our experiences and beliefs. Too often confused for its more celebrated sister science, psychology, sociology is the psychology of the people.


Sociologists explore how various aspects of our identity – gender, race, economic status, sexuality – show up and affect us in the world.

We discuss the “social construction zone” and how what has happened in the past affects people today. We examine power, who has which types of it — and, just as importantly, who doesn’t. As educators, we want students to learn about our social order, to reconsider and reimagine both it and their place in it.

Despite its centrality to understanding the collective human experience, sociology is marginalized in our schooling system. Sociology is not part of the core curriculum in K-12 education, and students can earn an undergraduate degree without taking a sociology class.

Becoming sociologically minded is not always easy. Quoting astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson, “In science, when human behavior enters the equation, things go nonlinear. That's why physics is easy and sociology is hard.”

As a normative sociologist, I encourage students to get curious and to use data to understand how we can learn from ourselves, what works and what doesn’t work, to build a better society for all people.

In recent years, I have felt incredulity for the ways in which the alt-right weaponizes the notion of freedom of speech. Conservative political pundits claim to be unable to speak freely, yet they have a platform to denounce social science fundamentals – and do so. Debating the theories of sociology is certainly acceptable but it is quite different from advocating the banning of sociological concepts from our schools.

As a tenured professor, I haven’t felt like I have full freedom of speech in my classroom; speaking without reservation about sociological content can feel risky. There are colleagues outside my department who dismiss sociologically driven insights. I worry a student in the class might record me, skewing content or taking what I say out of context to create a viral bit. I fear a public that does not value and will attack educated women talking honestly about our craft, which asks difficult, thorny questions with uncomfortable answers.

This negotiation to work within our current polemic political environment limits my ability to express freely. The notion of freedom of speech, and more specifically, the freedom of speech for whom, is at stake.

This hierarchy of “whose rights” is playing out across the nation and it plays out at the classroom level as well. Perversely, the ideal of freedom of speech has been commandeered by the alt-right as freedom to denounce legitimate and necessary social science knowledge. This shift has negative consequences for our youth, sociology educators, the public — all of us.

Nearly a dozen states have introduced bills directing what students can and cannot be taught about the role of enslavement in American history and ongoing racism. Florida lawmakers have proposed legislation that would prohibit classroom discussions about sexual orientation and gender identity. Labor history has long been absent from school curriculum.

At the root of the free speech debate is the fine line between speech that offends one’s sensibilities and speech that crosses the line into intolerance. Learning the reality of anti-Black racism, for example, may threaten some; however, antiracist curriculum is education, not hate speech.

In a highly polarized society, how do we keep ourselves and our school systems in contact with ideas that are enriching — and safe from ideas that are not so?

Sociology, because of the way it parses through, discerns and analyzes our collective ways, can help.

Education is meant to broaden horizons and encourage critical thinking through exposure to knowledge, new ideas and different ways of thinking.

Sociology faculty, educators and students deserve to live out freedom of speech, both on- and off-campus. We need people and institutions to invest in sociology. We need parents to write letters to school boards and administrators asking for more sociology in schools. And we need a political system that will take seriously the work of those of us who study society. The ability to open our minds, perhaps to uncomfortable ideas, which could help us to envision a socially sustainable future, may indeed be vital for our collective well-being.


Read More

Liberty and Justice for Some

Stephanie Toliver examines book bans, transgender rights in Kansas, the impacts of ICE detentions, and the history of conditional equality in America’s schools, libraries, and churches.

Getty Images, Catherine McQueen

Liberty and Justice for Some

Late February brought two stories that most Americans filed under separate categories. In Kansas, the state government invalidated the driver's licenses and birth certificates of transgender residents, erasing legal identities with the stroke of a pen. In New York, a Columbia University neuroscience student named Ellie Aghayeva was taken from her campus apartment by federal agents who misrepresented themselves to get through the door and held by ICE until the city's mayor personally petitioned for her release. Different people, different states, different mechanisms. The same message: for some of us, the promises of this nation were always conditional.

And yet, many Americans hold onto the lie of equality because acknowledging the truth would mean that the foundational promise we have repeated since childhood — liberty and justice for all — was never meant for all of us. It is far easier to accept comfortable fictions than to reckon with a truth that destabilizes everything you thought you knew. That meritocracy is real. That all are equal. That the documents we carry and the institutions we enter will protect us the same way they protect everyone else. But for many of us, there was never a fiction to hold onto. We were born into the conditions the lie was designed to obscure.

Keep ReadingShow less
Two individuals Skiing in the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Paralympic Games.

Oksana Masters of Team United States celebrates after winning gold in the Para Cross Country Skiing Sprint Sitting Final on day four of the Milano Cortina 2026 Winter Paralympic Games at Tesero Cross-Country Skiing Stadium on March 10, 2026 in Val di Fiemme, Italy.

Getty Images, Buda Mendes

The Paralympics Challenge Everything We Think We Know About Sports

If you’re a sports fan, you likely watched coverage of the 2026 Winter Olympics in Milano Cortina. But will you watch the Paralympics when approximately 665 athletes are expected in Italy to compete in the Para sports of alpine skiing, biathlon, cross-country skiing, ice hockey, snowboarding, and wheelchair curling?

The Paralympics, so-called because they are “parallel” to the Olympics, stand alone as the globe’s premier sporting event for elite athletes with disabilities. According to the International Paralympic Committee, 4,400 disabled athletes competed in the 2024 Paris Summer Games in track and field, swimming, and twenty other sports.

Keep ReadingShow less
How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values

FrameWorks Institute

How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change

Claiming Contested Values: How Fairness, Stability and Freedom Can Help Us Build Demand for Transformative, Structural Change, produced by the FrameWorks Institute, explores how widely shared yet politically contested values can be used to strengthen public support for systemic reform. Values are central to how advocates communicate the importance of their work, and they can motivate collective action toward big, structural changes. This has become especially urgent in a climate where executive orders are targeting diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, and some nonprofits are being labeled as threats based on their stated missions. Many civil society organizations are now grappling with how to communicate their values effectively and safely.

The report focuses on Fairness, Stability, and Freedom because they resonate across the U.S. public and are used by communicators across the political spectrum. Unlike values more closely associated with one ideological camp — such as Tradition on the right or Solidarity on the left — these three values are broadly recognizable but highly contested. Each contains multiple variants, and their impact depends on how clearly advocates define them and how they are paired with specific issues.

Keep ReadingShow less