This paper’s thesis is that the constructionist approach to social problems unintentionally directs its practitioners’ analytic attention toward “top-dog” claimsmakers while neglecting the claimsmaking of the marginalized. This neglect is the result of several common-sense assumptions about what social problems claims will look like and who they will be directed to. These assumptions include: 1) that institutional authorities are benign and trusted entities, 2) that claimsmakers have a right to freedom of expression and 3) that claims will be forwarded using words. Further, the need for constructionist analysts to be able to recognize the symbolic markers of a claim and to have access to those claims drives their attention toward claimsmakers who speak and act in ways that are familiar to them. Lastly, the paper examines how the inductive approach favored by constructionists exacerbates these issues by channeling its practitioners' attention toward activities that resemble the already existing model rather than ones that challenge it.