Musing on Social Justice Research Practices During Family Feud

I’ve been a fan of Family Feud all my life. I grew up watching it, and it was something I found comfort and entertainment in. I’ve shared this joy with many of my friends, although some expressed their dislike of Steve Harvey. I’ve only ever seen him on it, and I didn’t mind him at all. He’s a character; my mom even attended his live show in Chicago with a friend once.

I started college in the fall of 2014. I explicitly remember one day when my cluster mate had sprained her ankle, and to take her mind off of the pain, we watched Family Feud. We laughed, and had a great time. As I continued on in college, I definitely took on a new view of Family Feud.

As a sociology major, I became much better at the game. I didn’t think about my first instinct as my answer to the question as often; instead, I thought about the demographic they were sampling. If the question started, “we asked 100 men,” I tried to think of what the majority of 100 men would answer. This produced more answers that would show up on the board. I even started thinking about convincing my family to go on the show with me at one point.

This was around the time my mom gave me Steve Harvey’s book, Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man. I’ll admit, I didn’t finish the entire thing (sorry, mom!), but it did help me to understand my dad more, as he is a cisgender heterosexual man. Steve Harvey’s book was incredibly heteronormative, but I will also admit I did not realize it at the time.

The book told me things like “don’t have sex with a man you intend to marry until you’ve been dating for at least 3 months. Otherwise, he will not think you are marriage material, because you are not.” No, this is not an exact quote, but if you call Steve Harvey up, I think he would agree with this sentiment. It lauded women taking themselves seriously and valuing themselves enough to realize they are worth more than sex, and if the guy is the right one for them, they will happily wait. As someone who doubted my worth, this was a notion I could get on board with at the time.

Fast forward about 3 years and I am graduated with a Bachelors of Arts in Sociology. It is January of 2019, and I am sitting on my couch with my dad watching television. He watches a lot of news, but in all honesty I don’t think he cares for media that much (all types), as he usually hands me the remote after about 5 or 10 minutes and tells me to put on whatever I would like. He’s usually asleep within the next 15 minutes, anyway. Since I’m not actually going to put on whatever I would like, I put on the Game Show Network, since Family Feud is on and I know it is something we can both watch and enjoy.

Except this time something has changed.

This time, I am noticing the fact that the cable description for Family Feud has the word “survey” in it. I am noticing that at least 3 shows currently running on this network are based on surveys (Common Knowledge, America Says, Family Feud). I am realizing I have an issue with the first two titles I mentioned in those parentheses; I feel like I have to know what the Game Show Network classifies as “common knowledge” or what the Game Show Network thinks “America says.” As a social science researcher, I feel it is multimedia entertainment like this that makes people wave off survey results. I feel like it is CNN polls and the current President only tweeting favorable polls results (albeit skewed/unreliable) that is making the career path I am after seem frivolous.

I was told recently that I should come up with a structure for how to write articles. This was valuable advice; I would firmly advocate for the fact that no two pieces of my writing start the same. As I began to formulate the thoughts that eventually came out in this one, I pondered the idea of starting out each article with a statistic.

However, herein lies the problem I am attempting to tackle, and I am struggling. If the issues I am pointing out here have merit, then many would dismiss my articles immediately. I countered myself with the idea that I would ensure that the data I brought forth would be transparent and reliable; but the same issue remained. Those reading my article, the President’s tweets, or watching Family Feud would not be able to tell the difference between the reliable data and the unreliable. This is not a dig at these individuals; most of the time, I cannot either without the proper information. I will also admit; it is not the most exciting information to digest.

Our current climate does not allow space for the discussion around reliable data. How could it? We live in the era of “Fake News,” and the biggest secret I will divulge here is that while he is inherently wrong in how he uses the phrase, the leader of the free world has a point. He would know, considering his career has thrived this long on his relationship with the press. This relationship relied on the fact that the press would print whatever he told them, considering he actually spoke to them willingly. By being so forward, his actions were mistaken for transparency.

Things we read, see, and hear can seem transparent and real, all the while reinforcing dangerous stereotypes, racism, heteronormativity, ableism, misogyny, and privilege. Take this question from the “Fast Money” portion of one of tonight’s episodes:

“we asked 100 men how many exes a woman can have before you think twice about dating her”

·      3 (25 men)

·      10 (5 men)

·      2 was the #1 answer

Now on the surface, this might seem like a harmless question. But looking deeper, this question tells heterosexual women that they should not have more than 2, maybe 3 “exes,” or potential male partners might think twice about dating them. It also reinforces a cisgender, heteronormative narrative. There are numerous inherent problems with this question (which, I might add, two femmes participated in this particular round, with their two answers recorded above) that will most likely never be addressed, as it is a question on a game show on the Game Show Network. Most people’s reply to this paragraph of my article might be, “you’re reading too much into it,” or “who cares? There are much bigger problems in the world.” My reply to them would be, we have to read this deep into things like this, because I believe some of the key answers to the major issues we are facing (gross inequality and oppression of late capitalism, climate change, etc.).

Discourse is a powerful tool to reinforce an ideology. It is also something that can be easily shaken. Less than a year ago, I saw no issues with words like “man” or “woman” or ascribing pronouns to each person I met. I didn’t think twice about someone putting the word “black” before “narcissist” in a song. I didn’t look out from the 45th floor of the building I work at downtown Chicago and think about what the landscape looked like before Anglos came to this continent. 

These are things that, if you would like, you can think about as well. I will admit, it does not make for a care-free life. But I would like you to ask yourself, are you care-free right now? Do you have zero stress? If you can answer yes to either of those questions, I would love to sit down and have a conversation with you! If you answered no to either of those questions, I would still also love to have a conversation with you. These are important questions to be asking and answering in our society, because when our answers to questions such as these are shared, we find that we are not alone in our struggles. In fact, the majority of us are struggling.

I don’t mean to make this sound like we are victims of something. We are all surviving, and finding a way to make things work. For some of us, it is much easier than it is for others. For some of us, our lives are harder because it is easier for others. These are daily occurrences, and they need to be addressed.

When we stay in our own corners, holding onto the data that suits our narrative and the “facts” we hold to be true, the world will continue on the way it is. I imagine for some population out there, that is just fine. But I am hoping that this will resonate with a population out there that is hoping for things to be different. I am searching for those who are brave enough to imagine a world where our lives might be different.

I want to also clarify; when I say different, I mean radically different.

I mean a world in which reality television shows do not exist. I mean a world in which there are not homeless people. I mean a world in which there is not debt, or privilege, or oppression. No, I am not describing a utopia. I am describing a realistic world; in which we wholeheartedly change the way we operate. 

In order for this to be possible, I believe the first step is transparency. We have lost the art of being honest and real. We put on fronts, we try to be “put together.” We try to act as if we are firm in our beliefs, because to change them would label us a hypocrite.

I would like to live in a world where I can encounter new information, and deal with it in a rational, cordial way. Where I can engage with a person who has a different viewpoint than me and not feel scared that I will be personally attacked. Where there are not “sides,” but a spectrum; gender, color, and all of the other lines that currently divide us. I don’t want an “us” and “them,” although it may start out that way.

There will need to be an “other.” Except, I do not mean that word in the sense that it has been historically used (usually to exploit and oppress). I mean it in the sense of those who are holding us back from change. I mean those who try to challenge free thinkers and rule breakers. I mean those who do not see anything wrong with the current way we operate. These are the individuals that would make up “them.”

The “us” would be those who are tired of this current way of living. Those who are ready to be open and honest and to reap the benefits of being such a way. Those who are ready to hold others accountable for their actions, statements, and philosophy. Those who are ready to engage in discourse.

I am unsure how to leave this, now that I have dumped these thoughts out onto a screen (another issue for another time). I will rest knowing I have started something here, even if just in my own mind. I have acknowledged that a change has occurred. That’s a great place to start.