The Pecking Order: A Bold New Look at How Family and Society Determine Who We Become

by Dalton Conley

The family is our haven, the place where we all start off on equal footing — or so we like to think. But if that’s the case, why do so many siblings often diverge widely in social status, wealth, and education? In this groundbreaking and meticulously researched book, acclaimed sociologist Dalton Conley shatters our notions of how our childhoods affect us, and why we become who we are. Economic and social inequality among adult siblings is not the exception, Conley asserts, but the over half of all inequality is within families, not between them. And it is each family’s own “pecking order” that helps to foster such disparities. Moving beyond traditionally accepted theories such as birth order or genetics to explain family dynamics, Conley instead draws upon three major studies to explore the impact of larger social forces that shape each family and the individuals within it.

From Bill and Roger Clinton to the stories of hundreds of average Americans, here we are introduced to an America where class identity is ever changing and where siblings cannot necessarily follow the same paths. This is a book that will forever alter our idea of family.

Genres: Sociology, Nonfiction, Psychology, Family, Social Science, Parenting

320 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[aksnowbunny Proden · Rating 2 out of 5]

interesting, but really boring to read.

[Nourhan · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book challenged some of my basic assumptions about inequality in the United States. Most studies/books I have read looked at entire households rather than family members. The book argues, however, that "differences between families explain only 25 percent of the nation's income inequality; the remaining 75 percent is explained by differences between siblings." It raises some interesting and thought-provoking questions.

[Lynn · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is all over the place. The basic theme seems to be that almost anything you can imagine can change the possibilities for success between siblings. Who knew?

[Ty Keith · Rating 2 out of 5]

It is an interesting topic, but it could’ve been an article and saved people a lot of time. Each chapter begins by convincing you he’s going to make a new point, just to reaffirm the same one.

[Allison Bishop · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting take on why some siblings are more financially successful in life, for reasons other than birth order. This was not a book I could curl up with at night, but it had enough anecdotal stories in it to make it interesting enough to pick it up while eating my lunch every day, and he made some very good points that wouldn't have occurred to me otherwise. It definitely makes you look at your own family with a fresh eye, I can't say that I loved his conclusions that you should have no more than two children in order to maximize their chances of being financially successful (although he's probably correct, especially for those parents of limited means), and he believes in an inverse relationship between quantity and quality of children (he didn't specify, but I'm assuming he's limiting the "quality" assessment strictly to financial security).

[J.D. Steens · Rating 2 out of 5]

The book presents a lot of data, and it was easy to get lost as far as the main theme here other than he posits a few criteria as the standard for success and then says there’s a social pecking order relative to these criteria for success. But when it comes to what variables are key to explaining who is and who is not successful, this is where it gets fuzzy. As Conley concludes regarding his own trajectory relative to his sisters, he asks: “How much of these differences between my sister’s and my life are due to our family’s trajectory, to the local pecking order among our peer groups, and to the way our parents socialized each of us? And, alternatively, which differences are due to other factors like gender differences, birth order, and random events? And what about innate genetic predispositions, which kind of role do they play? The answer to all these questions is, of course, ‘Yes.”’ I think this last paragraph pretty well summarizes his explanation for what accounts for one’s relative position on the pecking order, though the subtitle, “how family and society determine who we become,” also sums it up well.

There are three other more fundamental problems with this book.

Conley presumes that all of us are affected by a pecking order. Here he draws on Rousseau’s argument that we are all born free and equal but society imposes inequality. That thesis needs some serious critiquing. For one thing, it presumes there’s one human nature when there is, per Darwinian theory, multiple human natures across a broad array of characteristics. On the hierarchical inequality scale, some are into it big time whereas many others are not into the race for relative rank and would just as soon be left alone where rank order doesn’t pertain other than when those into rank impose inequality at the latter’s expense. Rousseau might think we are all innately about equality but the counter argument is that while many are, many are not. The same could be argued about contemporary (i.e. not state of nature) social life.

By the same token, Conley’s standard for success is quite the conventional argument. It’s education (with special attention to elite colleges and private schools) , occupation, prestige, earnings. Here Conley is about who does and who does not have merit, but doesn’t the standard of success vary? If one is a custodian or landscaper or housekeeper or carpenter or electrician or truck driver, etc. and is good at their jobs and enjoy it, why isn’t this “success?” A whole tome could be written on this topic alone and how promoting the “meritocracy” line (merit’s flip side are those who don’t have merit) just reinforces what Rousseau was concerned about: socially imposed conditions of inequality.

Lastly, and related to the first two points, is the issue of genetic predisposition. Conley gives lip service to the role that genes play, but then snuffs it out by saying that the standard of success/unsuccess is socially determined. Anyone with more than one child knows that personality characteristics (“Character”) is pretty much evident from the get go. We are temperamentally (not deterministically and that whole trope) inclined toward one path and not another. How that gets manifested socially will vary, but the underlying motive force is clear enough: Those into hierarchy might be bullies, might be ambitious political types, might be friends who offer “helpful” advice, or pastors who need to strut their stuff in front of their flock. Those not into hierarchy might be the introverts who just want to be left alone, or the “common” man or woman who want to do their own thing. Or an identical twin can spend a life in an Eastern Ashram pursuing the meaning of life, whereas the other one can spend his life hiking in the forests experiencing the joys of life itself, in the moment. In other words, one motive force - freedom to be oneself, void of social pressures and noise - is expressed differently, but Conley conflates invariant motive force with variable social (i.e. phenotypic) expression. That’s a mistake in my view.

[Charles · Rating 3 out of 5]

I finished this book a couple months ago. The main theme is that family dynamics are predetermined based off of certain factors. Situation, time, and place have more influence on you than your choices. The book primarily uses examples from specific families and studies to examine outliers and provide explanations for them. Some of the theories are more theoretical than others. It is hard to prove any of the book's theories since there are thousands of small differences in everyone's life. The delivery of the book bogged it down the most. It overuses specific family examples as evidence. Repetition supports Conley's points but becomes boring near the end of each chapter. Ultimately, the book had some interesting ideas but was not exciting to read nor applicable to regular life.

[Heather · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some interesting ideas in this book - I'm not sure if I agreed with all of them, but as someone who has siblings (many of us do!), I think that I'll look at my family relationships with a different lens- probably won't change the dynamic much though.

[Shannan Debus · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very interesting book. Also seems well researched.

[Jennifer · Rating 2 out of 5]

I read this book when i was experiencing self hatred. I just couldn't figure out why i was the way i am. It didnt explain everything about me, but it definitely made me realize the pitfalls in my life which made me more prone to my faults (ie. because i am a middle child, my parents tend to overlook me--> causing me to be disillusioned that i dont need anyone in my life --> but secretly wanting attention and love.)

Yak yak yak~ easy read and entertaining.

As humans one can't help but analyze people, relationships, and of course oneself.

This book is one of those books where you're like "Makes SO MUCH SENSE!"

[Kimberly · Rating 3 out of 5]

I've been trying to read this book off and on for the past... ehh ... year and this week i finally got around to finishing it off. It's very sociological, and I ended up skipping a lot of the psycho-analysis in favor of reading all of the stories from the many families he interviewed. Conclusions were not helpful, basically says that yes, this OR this may or may not have an effect on how well siblings succeed. But the stories are really interesting, and there are some insightful cause-effect relationships investigated.

[Suzanne · Rating 3 out of 5]

An interesting book that talks about how siblings differ from each other in levels of success, and what factors contribute to sibling success. It had some good ideas, but wasn't exactly groundbreaking. Not the most fascinating boook, but I'm glad I read it. If anything, it tells you that parent's usually DON'T invest the same in every child. It can give you more compassion for your siblings and yourself.

[Melissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

A fairly readable look at why siblings can turn out vastly different from each other in class and social status. Probably more fun if you have siblings to compare yourself to... Conley pretty much leaves only children out of the equation, assuming that they get all of the family's resources and devotion. True to some extent, but it would have been interesting to hear more about families that are blended generationally, like mine was when I was growing up.

[Melissa · Rating 3 out of 5]

I thought this was an interesting book ... although when I was halfway through, I realized I had already read it a few years ago! What most struck me is how siblings can have such different childhood experiences, depending upon when they are born into a family. For example, the youngest in a family may grow up "wealthier" than the oldest, if the parents become more successful in their careers as the years go on.

[Elizabeth · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting - but I burned out half-way through. I enjoyed the detailed anecdotes the best and just picked a few in each chapter. Got the gist of his theory and didn't feel I needed to read it cover to cover.

[Cat · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some interesting points interspersed in a LOT of anecdotal stories and rambling about how it's hard to isolate variables and prove anything at all about anything. The interesting points were good enough to keep reading.

[Jennifer]

Been wanting to read this book since last year! If anyone has a copy, let me know. Its been out of stock at the library forever~ grrr >=T

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

I first had this rated with 4 stars, then changed to 5 stars. This book, after going back and re-reading parts and pieces, has forever changed the way I view my childhood, parents, and siblings.

[Sharon · Rating 4 out of 5]

It is insiteful . If you want to understand your role in your family of siblings, this will help you understand.

[Lenore · Rating 3 out of 5]

Conley succesfully demonstrates that many other factors besides birth order affect the relative success of siblings.

[Kristy MacPhail · Rating 2 out of 5]

5 million ways to mess up your kids - or - how your parents messed you up!

[Nicole · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book just might change how you view your siblings and everyone else you know.

[Ann · Rating 3 out of 5]

It's been so long...i want to read it again.

[David Bird · Rating 2 out of 5]

It's always a bad sign when a book on a topic you find very interesting leaves you with a profound sense of "so what."

[Maggie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Very interesting and informative, though at times depressing. Not a quick read by any stretch of the phrase!

[Margaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

Like this book enough to ask him to be a guest speaker at my conference this spring

[Margaret · Rating 4 out of 5]

Conley is so good at taking a family story and moving it form pat, cliche explanation to careful analysis of how class filters in to families' lives. Wow.

[Tchipakkan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Luckily, it didn't indicate that our birth order controls our destiny, but rather explains how it can effect it. Fascinating, but not as easy a read as some.

[Anna · Rating 3 out of 5]

It boils down to that conventional wisdom doesn't mean, or come to be proven by, anything. Fun, anecdotal stories, but if you're looking for something definitive, look elsewhere.