This article draws from the experiences and narratives of teenage activists throughout the Americas in order to add a needed dimension, that of peer political socialization, to the larger political and civic socialization literature. The authors argue that although the existing literature emphasizes the roles and responsibilities of adults in shaping young people’s civic capacities, the roles that young people play in socializing each other for political engagement is underexplored. Based on two qualitative studies of teenage activists throughout North and Latin America, the authors argue that teenage activists, who are largely left out of this literature, represent a different process by which youth engage in politics. We use teenagers’ narratives about their own youth-led political socialization to extend the existing theorizing on youth civic engagement, rethink some of its core tenets, and elucidate the roles that young people themselves play in the processes of political socialization.

This article provides a critical examination of a common form of adult attempts to promote civic engagement among young people, namely, youth advisory councils. While youth councils have been widely celebrated as an effective way to integrate young people into political processes, little research has explored why some politically active youth choose to leave, or refuse to join, youth councils. Based on two qualitative studies of politically active teens throughout North and Latin America, the authors argue that teenage activists possess valuable dissident knowledge of, and critical perspectives on, the potential for youth advisory councils to promote youth political power. We argue that young activists understand democracy in ways that are fundamentally different from that offered to them by youth councils. Youth activists put forth a theory of democracy that emphasizes authority and impact, not just voice; they understand democracy as representing collective concerns and perceive youth councils as elitist and nonrepresentative; and they emphasize the value of controversy and contentious politics while expressing anxiety that youth councils can function as modes of social control that tame and channel youth dissent, rather than opportunities to foster youth political power.

Sociologists have paid a great deal of attention to the idea that many aspects of human life are socially constructed. However, there has been far less attention to the concrete interactional processes by which this construction occurs. In particular, scholars have neglected how consensual meaning is constructed in verbal interaction. This article outlines nine generic construction tools used in everyday talk, based on a review and synthesis of past work. These tools fall into three general categories: building blocks, linking devices, and finishing devices. The authors argue that scholars must pay greater attention to the interactional nature of social construction, and discuss three interactional processes that are central to the social construction of meaning in talk: challenge, support, and non‐response. The article presents concrete illustrations of these processes using examples from focus group discussions about gender and violence. These micro‐interactional processes often reproduce, sometimes modify, and (more rarely) resist larger institutions and structures, and thus are indispensable to understanding social life.

Most research on youth subordination and age inequality focuses on macrolevel institutions, ideologies, and discourses. While important, this macrolevel focus mystifies the ways in which young people themselves conceptualize and negotiate ageism. This article examines how adolescents collectively experience, politicize, and respond to ageism as they become active in educational justice and antiwar movements. Based on comparative ethnographic research with youth movement organizations in Portland, Oregon and Oakland, California, the author argues that adolescents' politicized understandings of ageism profoundly shape their social movement strategies. Furthermore, these understandings of ageism are rooted in young people's race and class social locations, and stand in relationship to social movement legacies. The divergent ways in which white, middle-class youth activists and young working-class activists of color collectively experience, interpret, and respond to ageism reveal the extent to which age inequality operates in conjunction with other systems of power and privilege.

This article examines how gender shapes the development, involvement, and visibility of teenagers as political actors within their communities. Based on ethnographic research with two high school student movement organizations on the West Coast, the author argues that gender impacts the potential for young people's political consciousness to translate into public, social movement participation. Specifically, the gendered ways in which youth conceptualize and negotiate parental power influences whether or not, and in what ways, youth can emerge as visible agents of social change in their communities. For girl activists, there is more of a marked discontinuity between their political ideals and their political action because of their conflicts with parental power than for boys. This article considers the consequences of teens' relationships to parental power on their sociopolitical development, as well as the counter-effects posed by the feminist interventions of adult allies within youth movements.