Social constructionism theorizes that characteristics, which may be idealized as biological and unchanging, are really products of definition and explication by humans, which are shaped continuously by culture and history (Kang, 22). Therefore, social constructions are specific to culture, and vary throughout the time in which they exist. Because of this, they take on different meanings for each individual. Social constructions are perpetually challenged, and changing. Gender, in particular, only exists due to the concept of social construction. Historically, females have been expected to be submissive, fragile caregivers while their male counterparts were seen to be the strong, masculine providers for their families. These values have changed over time, with women becoming more vocal and men embracing their feminine sides. Gender is being seen less and less as a rigid, linear spectrum, thus allowing for the idea of gender to fluctuate now more than ever. As a result, an abundance of new genders are being recognized and accepted every day. (OpenStax, “Social Constructs of Reality”)
Chapter two of Jeffry Reiman’s book The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison, entitled “A Crime by Any Other Name”, argues that many of the most detrimental acts are not defined by criminal law—particularly, those enacted by corporations. He expands on this argument by discussing the effects of occupational hazards, health care, chemical warfare, and poverty. The category of occupational hazards illustrate the figures of work-related illness and deaths, as well as the insurance and liability factors that minimize these numbers. In 2010, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) announced 3.1 million occupational injuries and illnesses, 200,000 cases of other physical harm, and 50,000 work-related deaths. According to Reiman, lung illnesses are one of the most common forms of work-place related illnesses. He states that "260,000 miners receive benefits for black-lung disease, and… 4,000 retired miners die from the illness or its complications each year”. He continues, arguing that “100,000 American cotton textile workers suffer breathing impairments caused by acute byssinosis”, and that “anywhere from 18,400 and 598,000 deaths from lung cancer would result from exposure to asbestos” (Reiman, 91). Reiman had opened the chapter with an anecdote comparing Colin Ferguson, who murdered six people on a commuter train, to the owners of a mine in Kentucky, where ten people were killed in a methane explosion. The company had pleaded guilty to safety misconduct, and was was sentenced to pay $3.75 million. The mine’s foreman was given probation to six months in prison. The case of the mine explosion is labeled as a “tragedy” rather than a “murder”, even though people were responsible for the deaths of the ten miners. (Reiman, 66)
This section segued into the next, “Health Care May be Dangerous to Your Health”, which covers injuries and deaths from improper medical care. The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) reported that the third leading cause of death in the U.S., after heart disease and cancer, is improper medical treatment, with an estimated 225,000 deaths annually. Approximately 2 million U.S. citizens fall ill with infections associated with medical care. These cases could have been avoided entirely with appropriate hygiene requirements. Dr. George A. Silver of the Yale University School of Medicine attributes 15,000 annual deaths to unnecessary surgery, which also cost a collective $4 million. To compare, the FBI reported nearly 2,000 murders resulting from stab wounds or lacerations; however, if the FBI included deaths from unnecessary surgeries, the number would have increased to upwards of 14,000 murders. But surgeries aren’t the only unnecessary treatments. Twenty-two percent of the 6 billion annual doses of antibiotics are unnecessary, and 10,000 of those cases result in severe reactions or deaths. This means that between 2,000 and 10,000 people would not have died, had they not been given the medication. (Reiman, 94)
Reiman argues that almost fifty percent of Americans will develop cancer within their lifetime, caused by a variety of factors including cigarettes, pesticides, food additives, pollution, and other environmental factors. The President’s Cancer Panel announced that “approximately forty-one percent of people in the U.S. will be diagnosed with cancer at some point in their lives, and about twenty-one percent will die from cancer.” The President’s Counsel on Environmental Quality states that up to ninety percent of cancers are due to environmental factors, and therefore are technically preventable. Reiman compares these figures to “a foreign invader who was killing 1,500 people a day and bent on slaughtering one-fifth of the present population” (Reiman, 96). If cancer were this foreign invader, every attempt would be made to stop them. A national effort to reduce these cancer-causing environmental factors could save at least 400,000 lives annually, and reduce the chances of developing cancer from almost fifty percent to roughly eight percent. Funding for research on primary prevention is insignificant, and the research on avoidable exposures to carcinogens is minimal.
Finally, Reiman argues that poverty and inequality matters less than our failure to attempt to counteract it. In the U.S., race, income, and wealth are interconnected. This fact creates a disproportionate impact on minority populations. In 2010, almost twenty-eight percent of African Americans were below the national poverty line, compared to ten percent of white Americans. An article in JAMA explains that “people who are poor have higher mortality rates for heart disease, diabetes mellitus, high blood pressure, lung cancer, neural tube defects, injuries, and low birth weight, as well as lower survival rates from breast cancer” (Reiman, 103). This is all due to the fact that less money means less things, less nutrition, less distance from toxic sites, and less access to medical care. Because we as a society allow poverty to exist and thrive, we should be held responsible for the harm it does to those at the bottom.
My best friend Natalia has been affected by the social construction of reality in many ways. She grew up in a lower-class family, survived childhood lung cancer, and is hard of hearing. Natalia and I attended the same private Catholic high school, which was full of wealthy upper-class students. As a result, she felt as though she needed to conform to their norms in order to fit in. This manifested in her purchasing of expensive shoes, expensive prom dresses, and other lavish accessories to present an illusion of wealth and status, which hid the reality of which she was ashamed. Natalia has been learning American Sign Language for several years, but she refuses to wear the hearing aids that she needs. She does not want to be associated with the negative connotations related to the medical model of disability—that her flaws needed to be fixed at an individual level (Kang, 22) . Natalia was diagnosed with lung cancer when she was fifteen years old. After she told me her news, she begged me not to tell anyone and not to treat her any differently than I had when she was healthy. She was afraid of the negative connotations of sickness. Thankfully, she has made a full recovery and has been in remission for three years. Each of these labels—lower-class, disabled, and sick—were created from social constructionism. Natalia is no less of a person because of her circumstances, because none of these labels are biological or unchanging; rather, they are a figment of human imagination.