Risk and social theory – a new venture and some new avenues

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image size

Notes

^1. Green is certainly correct, however, in describing a number of empirical studies as being blinkered by risk (see also Heyman (2013)).

^2. Risks may of course be conceived differently within various emic accounts.

^3. Of course, various readings of Marx emphasise the significance he placed upon the body (O’Neill 1995, Williams and Bendelow 1998, p. 4).

^4. Though note the use of plurals here as opposed one reality or property.

^5. Other ways of thinking about irritation are apparent within sociological approaches to the body, such as Nettleton and colleagues (2011) use of Leder’s dys-appearing body and, also applied in this work, Shilling’s (2008) conceptualisation of varying degrees of (dis)equilibrium between the internal environment of the body and the external features of the social and physical environment.

^6. Anti-psychiatry critiques are one example of the way in which a politically oriented strong constructionism may develop ambivalences towards inequality and vulnerability. On the one hand, this approach emphasises the harm being done to those through diagnosis and treatment. But by emphasising the constructed nature of diagnosis, this approach may distract from and even detract from understandings of the social patterning of mental health and illness experiences.

^7. Montelius incidentally also emphasises an intersectionality approach.