The Sociologist's Dojo
@thesociologists.bsky.social
2.4K followers 2.4K following 800 posts
The Sociologist's Dojo is a blog and podcast focusing on the social analysis of film and popular culture using the Sociological Perspective. Blog http://thesociologistsdojo.blogspot.com Podcast https://thesociologistsdojo.libsyn.com/
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
thesociologists.bsky.social
I know, right! Like, broaden your cinematic horizons, my dude. Stop watching the same 6 films by the same 3 Mediocre men who barely peaked in the 70's And, I'd appreciate not having a zillion of the same shit takes on my timeline.
thesociologists.bsky.social
So many of my fellow White Middle Aged Men posting about Diane Keaton with photos and quotes from The Godfather Trilogy are telling on themselves because that's the only role they've seen her in
She's had better roles, many of them scribed by people who could write women with more than 2 dimensions
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
aliciamwalker1.bsky.social
Theo thinks he’s the main character, but we’re still waiting on the plot. 🎭
Our new Challenge podcast episode’s out, and we have thoughts.
🎧 open.spotify.com/episode/4yzx...
#TheChallenge41 #thechallenge
Season 41, Episode 11 - Theo’s Giving Main Character, But the Script Is Blank | The Challenge Recap
open.spotify.com
thesociologists.bsky.social
🚨 New Essay Alert 🚨

The Films of Julia Ducournau: Raw.

I discuss cannibalism connection with capitalism and sexuality, fourth wave Feminism, sisterhood, and the pretentious label of "elevated horror"

Enjoy! #sociology #moviereviews

thesociologistsdojo.blogspot.com/2025/10/the-...
The Films of Julia Ducournau: Raw
The first film in my analysis of the films of Julia Ducournau is the coming-of-age body horror film Raw. Ducournau’s full-len...
thesociologistsdojo.blogspot.com
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
jdcmedlock.bsky.social
“I’ll declare war on you if you don’t give me the peace prize” is an incredible bit
thesociologists.bsky.social
Draft of October's Essay complete. Editing and publication tomorrow, 10/10. Stay tuned.
thesociologists.bsky.social
Ghouls.
thetnholler.bsky.social
CHICAGO — Outside an elementary school during dismissal… horrifying. What have we become?
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
mollyploofkins.bsky.social
John Oliver: "If ICE can bother some guys at a roofing job, bystanders can bother ICE at their state-sanctioned kidnapping job."
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
gbrockell.bsky.social
Claim: 10 cars rammed ICE
Truth: No cars rammed ICE

Claim: She boxed ICE in
Truth: ICE boxed her in

Claim: She shot a rifle at ICE
Truth: She did not have a rifle

Claim: ICE returned fire
Truth: Only ICE fired

Claim: She drove herself to the hospital
Truth: Paramedics found her
thesociologists.bsky.social
Really?! We couldn't find anyone else who might fit the parameters of this award better than a rich white celebrity? This seems politically calculated.
thesociologists.bsky.social
Misogynistic Patriarchy is when douche bag tech bro men defend and value the personhood of an algorithm over that of women.
thesociologists.bsky.social
The Robert's Court's judgments have given Trump 20 out of 22 favorable judicial decisions in the first 8 months of the administration's second term.
jewishreader.bsky.social
This is why the Federalist Society went on a 40 year mission to take over the court. For this exact reason.
peterbakernyt.bsky.social
Trump has sought emergency intervention by the Supreme Court 28 times in the first eight months of his new term, more than Bush, Obama and Biden did combined over 20 years. www.wsj.com/us-news/law/...
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
rbreich.bsky.social
Presidents? SCOTUS gives them immunity.

Corporations? SCOTUS makes it easier for them to pollute.

Billionaires? SCOTUS says they can buy elections.

But if you look Latino, speak Spanish, or work at a low wage job, SCOTUS says you can be abducted by masked agents.

The legacy of the Roberts court.
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
chrisgeidner.bsky.social
BREAKING: The First Circuit rejects Trump's executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. In the New Jersey-led multistate case, the appeals court, in a 100-page ruling, keeps the nationwide scope of the injunction blocking the EO in place. storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...
The Government now asks us to reverse the preliminary
injunctions in these cases. We see no reason to do so. The
Government is right that the Framers of the Citizenship Clause
sought to remove the stain of Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 119
How.) 393 (1857), which shamefully denied United States
citizenship to "descendants of Africans who were imported into
this country, and sold as slaves," even when the descendants were born here. Id. at 403. But the Framers chose to accomplish that
just purpose in broad terms, as both the supreme Court in United
States . Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), and Congress in
passing § 1401(a) have recognized. The Government is therefore
wrong to argue that the plaintiffs are not likely to succeed in
showing that the children that the EO covers are citizens of this
country at birth, just as the Government is wrong to argue that
various limits on our remedial power independently require us to
reverse the preliminary injunctions.? The analysis that follows is necessarily lengthy, as we
must address the parties' numerous arguments in each of the cases
involved. But the length of our analysis should not be mistaken
for a sign that the fundamental question that these cases raise
about the scope of birthright citizenship is a difficult one.
•It
is not, which may explain why it has been more than a century since a branch of our government has made as concerted an effort as the
Executive Branch now makes to deny Americans their birthright. Thus, it is no surprise that, when presented with even
more uncontroverted evidence by the State-Plaintiffs about the
need for an injunction of the current breadth, the District Court
again found that a narrower injunction would leave unremedied
"administrative and financial harms." We therefore decline to
conclude that the District Court has abused its discretion in
fashioning relief. See Philip Morris, Inc. v. Harshbarger, 159
F. 3d 670, 680 (1st Cir. 1998) (explaining that "[als a general
rule, a disappointed litigant cannot surface an objection to a preliminary injunction for the first time in an appellate venue"
because doing so deprives the district court of the opportunity to
"consider [the objection] and correct the injunction if necessary,
without the need for appeal" (quoting Zenon, 711 F.2d at 478)). The "lessons of history" thus give us every reason to be
wary of now blessing this most recent effort to break with our
established tradition of recognizing birthright citizenship and to
make citizenship depend on the actions of one's parents rather
than -- in all but the rarest of circumstances -- the simple fact
of being born in the United States. United States v. Di Re, 332
U.S. 581, 595 (1948). Nor does the text of the Fourteenth
Amendment, which countermanded our most infamous attempt to break
with that tradition, permit us to bless this effort, any more than
does the Supreme Court's interpretation of that amendment in Wong
Kim Ark, the many related precedents that have followed it, or
Congress's 1952 statute writing that amendment's words in the U.S.
Code.
The District Court's order for entry of the preliminary
injunctions is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded for
further consideration consistent with this decision.
Reposted by The Sociologist's Dojo
chanda.blacksky.app
🚨🚨 My dear friend and fellow academic, the Palestinian American sociologist @emanabdelhadi.bsky.social has been taken by the Cook County Sheriff near Chicago. They have not mirandized her. Please signal boost. All eyes on Broadview for Eman and the community she was defending 🚨🚨
thesociologists.bsky.social
The answer, in short, is the Reaganite Western form of bureaucratic capitalism. Max Weber describes this as standardization - a component of "The Iron Cage"