Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorIrvine, Janice M.
dc.date.accessioned2022-06-21T09:51:24Z
dc.date.available2022-06-21T09:51:24Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.identifierOCN: 1319226414
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/57065
dc.description.abstractMarginal People in Deviant Places revisits early- to mid-twentieth-century ethnographic studies, arguing that their focus on marginal subcultures—ranging from American hobos, to men who have sex with other men in St. Louis bathrooms, to hippies, to taxi dancers in Chicago, to elderly Jews in Venice, California—helped produce new ways of thinking about social difference more broadly in the United States. Irvine demonstrates how the social scientists who told the stories of these marginalized groups represented an early challenge to then-dominant narratives of scientific racism, prefiguring the academic fields of gender, ethnic, sexuality, and queer studies in key ways. In recounting the social histories of certain American outsiders, Irvine identifies an American paradox by which social differences are both despised and desired, and she describes the rise of an outsider capitalism that integrates difference into American society by marketing it.en_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.subject.otherSociety and culture: general;Sociology;Gender studies, gender groups;Ethnic studies;Gay and Lesbian studies / LGBTQ studiesen_US
dc.titleMarginal People in Deviant Placesen_US
dc.title.alternativeEthnography, Difference, and the Challenge to Scientific Racismen_US
dc.typebook
oapen.identifier.doi10.3998/mpub.11519906en_US
oapen.relation.isPublishedBye07ce9b5-7a46-4096-8f0c-bc1920e3d889en_US
oapen.relation.isbn9780472055388en_US
oapen.pages348en_US
peerreview.anonymityDouble-anonymised
peerreview.idd98bf225-990a-4ac4-acf4-fd7bf0dfb00c
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityScientific or Editorial Board
peerreview.review.decisionYes
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.review.typeFull text
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.titleExternal Review of Whole Manuscript
oapen.review.commentsThe proposal was selected by the acquisitions editor who invited a full manuscript. The full manuscript was reviewed by two external readers using a double-blind process. Based on the acquisitions editor recommendation, the external reviews, and their own analysis, the Executive Committee (Editorial Board) of U-M Press approved the project for publication.


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record