This reading on Teenage Wasteland by Donna Gaines was so interesting to me. She says "When one teenager commits suicide it is a personal tragedy, but when groups of teenagers commit suicide pacts and successfully carry it out, suicide becomes a matter of public concern". This stood out to me because I looked at it In views of gun control.
For example after the Sandy Hooks massacre people wanted to enforce and change the laws on gun control because they were devastated about what happened to the children. But if you think about it thousands of kids die each day because of guns and have for years. So why is it that gun control hasn't been enforced in previous years when other innocent children have died of different ethnicities or economic structures? Don't get me wrong I am glad that laws are being changed because of this incident and as they should be. I just think if laws had been passed in the previous years when these same tragedies occurred this massacre could have been prevented.
To me this is how I saw this article as I was reading it. Thousands of kids commit suicide and it is not viewed as a public concern until it affects a whole community. Why is it that society waits for the worst to happen to make change when it could easily be prevented from the beginning?
Society has created these stereotypes and categories in which we all label are selves with such as "popular, jocks, preps, nerds, or burnouts". We don't realize how psychological damaging this could be, or emotionally draining for others. I think a lot of teenagers only care about fitting In because that's what society has made them think is the "norm".
It's like what the author said at the end of the story that she believes if the four kids where in another decade they wouldn't have committed suicide because they might have had other choices. I think that's how these kids felt. I think that's why they made the choice to "escape" because they thought it was a way of getting away with their "bad lives". What these kids needed was love and support and acceptance from someone being that society wasn't giving it to them.
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Sunday, May 26, 2013
Wednesday, May 22, 2013
Blog 10 - Race & Ethnicity
In chapter 10 the text book talks about how our culture and society has invented the role of ethnicity and race. The book defines ethnicity as a shared cultural heritage, often deriving from a common ancestry and homeland. Ethnicities are social constructions that only exist to the extent that people embrace them or have them imposed by others. An example of this is when people identify themselves with their specific ancestry, such as Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, or Columbians etc. In contrast to this race is defined as a category of people widely perceived as sharing socially significant physical characteristics such as skin color. Race as well is socially constructed because as the book says that race only exist to the extent that people use physical characteristics to assign one another to social categories, even though those categories do not represent biological meaningful divisions in the human species.
This relates a lot to the video on Race: The power of Illusion I found this video really interesting and mind blowing. The video talks about race differences and how much biology really plays in distinguishing different races. In all reality there is no difference biologically in any of the races. Its merely an illusion that society has constructed in to humans all around the world to believe that there is a superior races. What I found interesting about this video was the experiment the students did on their DNA's to see which race they are most similar to and which one is the most different. Most of the white students though their DNA would be most compatible with other white students, most African American students thought their DNA would be most compatible with other African American students and etc. When the test was done they all realized that their DNA was most compatible with every other race. The main question was then, are all whites African American and Hispanic and Asian? If you want to base it in societies terms then, yes. But in all reality it does not matter where we are from or the color of our skin or our socioeconomic status, all of us human beings share most of the same DNA. When we go to Africa not all of the people are dark skin, you will run into people who are so light skinned that they look white. If you go to the Dominican republic you don't just find tan people, you find people who are black, white, etc. And in Mexico you don't just find tan people, you find people who look Asian, and black and white etc. In fact what I found the most interesting was one the video said that if the whole world was wiped out, we would be able to rebuild a society with merely just people from Africa, after all that is where we all came from.
The book says that all humans share a common ancestral lineage that evolved in Africa about 100,000 - 200,000 years ago. So if you really think about it we all share the same "ethnicity". By identifying certain cultural or physical traits as socially significant, people create a social reality that influences how they behave around one another. By basing people in terms of race, ethnicity, and other social categories can affect how we act towards them and helping to legitimize social inequality based on those categories. With this comes discrimination which is unequal treatment that gives advantage to one group of people over another without justifiable causes. This is something commonly seen here in the U.S especially between whites and other races. Over time whites have always been the superior race over blacks, hispanics, asians and etc. Whites have more privileges, rights, and wealth over any other races. We have seen this happen over time through slavery, segregation, and our socioeconomic inequality now. We seen how races and ethnic groups endure inequality through housing, because many racial groups live in bad neighborhoods because they do not have the same privileges as whites to better paying jobs so they are not able to live in nicer areas. With this comes education, many minority groups do not have the advantage of having good teacher so the ones they do have are less experienced and are more likely to be teaching outside of their expertise. Health care is another inequality racial minorities and hispanics receive by having lower standards of health care than do whites which is why more racial groups die of health problems than do whites. The media also stereotypes (exaggerated, distorted, or untrue generalizations about categories of people that do not acknowledge individual variations.) racial and ethnic groups by portraying them the same as in past history. Lastly economics plays an important role in inequality because blacks and hispanics are 3x more likely to be poor than are whites. Blacks have only about one-tenth of the wealth of whites.
This also relates to the reading, I read The Hispanic Dropout Mystery. This article talks about how the reason many hispanics drop out of school is due to the fact they are failing, the find no interest in school, or because they are working to support a family. Hispanics say that the public schools marginalize them, disrespecting their culture, neglecting their language problems, and setting standards so low that kids can’t help but reduce expectations. Of course the debates that others have is that they choose to give up on their education. This relates to the face that hispanics as a minority group are already set up to a disadvantage in education especially here in the U.S because many of them do not speak the language and rather than helping them we stereotype and discriminate them by judging their circumstances and blaming them rather than gives useful resources and helping them. Of course hispanics are not the only ones susceptible to this inequality so are other minority groups that are not white.
I really like the reading, but more so I enjoyed the video because it talks about how much society has imprinted in out minds the structure of how class, race and gender should be even though it is all just an invention from out culture. I think everyone should watch this video because its really an eye opener. I always new about race and ethnicity and I've even judged people by the way of their appearance. For example the first day of classes I always look at everyone around the room, right away I see who are the smart ones, who are the lazy ones, who looks friendly, who looks annoying. As well as I think in my head "Oh she's asian, she's black, she's hispanic so I can relate more to her" and etc. When in all reality you can not always base everything off of appearance. Maybe the asian girl is really Mexican, and maybe that hispanic girl you think you can relate to you, is the complete opposite of you and you relate more to the African American girl. I think its important to know that their is absolutely no difference in any race or ethnicity, at least not biologically in fact we are compatible and just like any other human being. The scary part through this whole video and reading, and text is knowing that everything we ever thought was "real" from birth, was nothing but a social construction made by the superior race, to maintain their power by implementing in the minority group that our society is the right way to live, even though its unequal.
This relates a lot to the video on Race: The power of Illusion I found this video really interesting and mind blowing. The video talks about race differences and how much biology really plays in distinguishing different races. In all reality there is no difference biologically in any of the races. Its merely an illusion that society has constructed in to humans all around the world to believe that there is a superior races. What I found interesting about this video was the experiment the students did on their DNA's to see which race they are most similar to and which one is the most different. Most of the white students though their DNA would be most compatible with other white students, most African American students thought their DNA would be most compatible with other African American students and etc. When the test was done they all realized that their DNA was most compatible with every other race. The main question was then, are all whites African American and Hispanic and Asian? If you want to base it in societies terms then, yes. But in all reality it does not matter where we are from or the color of our skin or our socioeconomic status, all of us human beings share most of the same DNA. When we go to Africa not all of the people are dark skin, you will run into people who are so light skinned that they look white. If you go to the Dominican republic you don't just find tan people, you find people who are black, white, etc. And in Mexico you don't just find tan people, you find people who look Asian, and black and white etc. In fact what I found the most interesting was one the video said that if the whole world was wiped out, we would be able to rebuild a society with merely just people from Africa, after all that is where we all came from.
The book says that all humans share a common ancestral lineage that evolved in Africa about 100,000 - 200,000 years ago. So if you really think about it we all share the same "ethnicity". By identifying certain cultural or physical traits as socially significant, people create a social reality that influences how they behave around one another. By basing people in terms of race, ethnicity, and other social categories can affect how we act towards them and helping to legitimize social inequality based on those categories. With this comes discrimination which is unequal treatment that gives advantage to one group of people over another without justifiable causes. This is something commonly seen here in the U.S especially between whites and other races. Over time whites have always been the superior race over blacks, hispanics, asians and etc. Whites have more privileges, rights, and wealth over any other races. We have seen this happen over time through slavery, segregation, and our socioeconomic inequality now. We seen how races and ethnic groups endure inequality through housing, because many racial groups live in bad neighborhoods because they do not have the same privileges as whites to better paying jobs so they are not able to live in nicer areas. With this comes education, many minority groups do not have the advantage of having good teacher so the ones they do have are less experienced and are more likely to be teaching outside of their expertise. Health care is another inequality racial minorities and hispanics receive by having lower standards of health care than do whites which is why more racial groups die of health problems than do whites. The media also stereotypes (exaggerated, distorted, or untrue generalizations about categories of people that do not acknowledge individual variations.) racial and ethnic groups by portraying them the same as in past history. Lastly economics plays an important role in inequality because blacks and hispanics are 3x more likely to be poor than are whites. Blacks have only about one-tenth of the wealth of whites.
This also relates to the reading, I read The Hispanic Dropout Mystery. This article talks about how the reason many hispanics drop out of school is due to the fact they are failing, the find no interest in school, or because they are working to support a family. Hispanics say that the public schools marginalize them, disrespecting their culture, neglecting their language problems, and setting standards so low that kids can’t help but reduce expectations. Of course the debates that others have is that they choose to give up on their education. This relates to the face that hispanics as a minority group are already set up to a disadvantage in education especially here in the U.S because many of them do not speak the language and rather than helping them we stereotype and discriminate them by judging their circumstances and blaming them rather than gives useful resources and helping them. Of course hispanics are not the only ones susceptible to this inequality so are other minority groups that are not white.
I really like the reading, but more so I enjoyed the video because it talks about how much society has imprinted in out minds the structure of how class, race and gender should be even though it is all just an invention from out culture. I think everyone should watch this video because its really an eye opener. I always new about race and ethnicity and I've even judged people by the way of their appearance. For example the first day of classes I always look at everyone around the room, right away I see who are the smart ones, who are the lazy ones, who looks friendly, who looks annoying. As well as I think in my head "Oh she's asian, she's black, she's hispanic so I can relate more to her" and etc. When in all reality you can not always base everything off of appearance. Maybe the asian girl is really Mexican, and maybe that hispanic girl you think you can relate to you, is the complete opposite of you and you relate more to the African American girl. I think its important to know that their is absolutely no difference in any race or ethnicity, at least not biologically in fact we are compatible and just like any other human being. The scary part through this whole video and reading, and text is knowing that everything we ever thought was "real" from birth, was nothing but a social construction made by the superior race, to maintain their power by implementing in the minority group that our society is the right way to live, even though its unequal.
Blog 9 - Gender and Sex Inequality
In chapter 11 the text talks about the inequalities we face around the world based on our gender & sex. You may think that they both mean the same (as did I) but in fact they both have different meanings. The text defines Gender as the socially constructed cultural expectations associated with women and men. Whereas Sex is the biological distinction between females and males. The book says that absolute sex differences include those related to reproduction, such as only females can become pregnant and only males can impregnate females. Basically the differences we associate with men and women are culturally produces, not biologically based. From birth we are taught our cultures expectations regarding gender. With gender also comes deviance acts from different groups such as gender expression which is the communication of a persons gender identity to others, through behavior,clothing, hairstyles, and other means. I am sure that all of us have encountered that man walking down the street with a wig, lipstick, women's clothing or the women with a man's haircut or men's clothing, these people are called transgender who are individuals that identify with a gender different from the one associated with their sex. Gender inequality is globally seen with different ideas about what it means to be a women or a man, depending on their class, race, and other social characteristics. Gender distinction and power is best described as sexism which is the ideology that one sex is superior to the other. In many places such as the U.S men are superior to women. Boys are raised to be men by not acting like "girls". It is perceived to be negative if they act like girls by being emotional or sensitive and they are criticized for it. This is known as Gender Stratification which refers to the systematic and unequal distribution of power and resources in society between women and men. This is seen a lot in the work place, because men are payed more than women for doing the same job. One result of this discrimination in the work place is the glass ceiling which is the often invisible barrier created by individuals and institutional sexism that prevents qualified women from advancing to high levels of leadership and management.
Sexuality also falls as a victim of social construction because it reflects a cultures collective norms. It is thought that the normal way of having relationships is through the traditional Heterosexuals who are attracted to people of the opposite sex. With this comes sexual identity which is our sense of self as it relates to the type of sexual attractions we have for others. The other types of sexual identity groups are: Homosexuals who are attracted to people of the same sex, Bisexuals are people who are attracted to people of both sexes, and Asexual people experience no sexual attraction for anyone.
A better way to understand sexual orientation is through the reading I chose which is called Understanding Sexual Orientation. This article talks about how "sexual orientation is not a matter of clear-cut differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals, but it is better described as a continuum by which most people combine elements of both". The article talks about how people believe that people are born one fate, and that the chances for one to change his pattern of course in life is very little. These people believe that one persons choice of sexual partner is correlated with various physical and mental qualities that make a male or female distinct from a heterosexual person. Some examples of this is through obvious and recognizable qualities such as the way they walk, talk, dress, act, etc. Many people believe that their are two completely different types of males in homosexuals and heterosexuals. People say that homosexual males tend to like music and arts rather than sports, as well as they maybe more sensitive and emotional rather than tough and assertive. But the fact of reality is that these beliefs are false. Only the human mind invents categories and tries to force facts. This is why this article relates to the text reading because just like race and ethnicity inequality, gender and sex inequality is socially constructed. These are all ways that we are taught and raised to believe is the right way to believe our society is the right way to live even though it is merely an example of the inequalities we still face today just as we once did with slavery, and segregation. In any matters I feel race, ethnicity, gender, and sex inequality is much worst, because we are taught this from birth and without even realizing we justify the inequalities because they are sugarcoated by the dominating and superior race, ethnicity, gender, and sex.
Sexuality also falls as a victim of social construction because it reflects a cultures collective norms. It is thought that the normal way of having relationships is through the traditional Heterosexuals who are attracted to people of the opposite sex. With this comes sexual identity which is our sense of self as it relates to the type of sexual attractions we have for others. The other types of sexual identity groups are: Homosexuals who are attracted to people of the same sex, Bisexuals are people who are attracted to people of both sexes, and Asexual people experience no sexual attraction for anyone.
A better way to understand sexual orientation is through the reading I chose which is called Understanding Sexual Orientation. This article talks about how "sexual orientation is not a matter of clear-cut differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals, but it is better described as a continuum by which most people combine elements of both". The article talks about how people believe that people are born one fate, and that the chances for one to change his pattern of course in life is very little. These people believe that one persons choice of sexual partner is correlated with various physical and mental qualities that make a male or female distinct from a heterosexual person. Some examples of this is through obvious and recognizable qualities such as the way they walk, talk, dress, act, etc. Many people believe that their are two completely different types of males in homosexuals and heterosexuals. People say that homosexual males tend to like music and arts rather than sports, as well as they maybe more sensitive and emotional rather than tough and assertive. But the fact of reality is that these beliefs are false. Only the human mind invents categories and tries to force facts. This is why this article relates to the text reading because just like race and ethnicity inequality, gender and sex inequality is socially constructed. These are all ways that we are taught and raised to believe is the right way to believe our society is the right way to live even though it is merely an example of the inequalities we still face today just as we once did with slavery, and segregation. In any matters I feel race, ethnicity, gender, and sex inequality is much worst, because we are taught this from birth and without even realizing we justify the inequalities because they are sugarcoated by the dominating and superior race, ethnicity, gender, and sex.
Monday, May 13, 2013
Blog 8 - Class inequality kills
The reading that I chose to read was Cause of Death: Inequality by: Alejandro Reuss. This reading talks about how different classes are unequal towards different groups based on their income. For example the high income groups feel they are superior, have more power and are better than those groups with lower income. This relates to chapter 9 - Class & Global Inequality because it talks about the same idea on page 224 in the section of class inequality in the United States. It talks about how class inequality is due to the stratification system which is characterized by three elements:
1. The unequal distribution of valuable resources.
2. Distinctive groups that makeup the various strata in society.
3. An ideology, or system of beliefs, that explains and justifies the existence of inequality.
The high class groups is made up of the capitalist class which is people who are wealthy. The text book defines wealth as the value of financial assets such as saint, real estate, stocks, and bonds, minus any outstanding debt. This class is made up of about 1% of the U.S population, who has inherited money from generation to generation, people who own companies and have invested and etc. The middle class is a group that contributes specialized knowledge and expertise to the economy. This group usually obtains college professions, and has essential resources. This group is made up of 45% of the population, their occupations tends to be schoolteachers low-level managers, social workers. The working class is like the middle class but they usually make a product or provide a service and earn hourly wages. This group is made up of 45% of the population such as mechanics, electricians and technicians and service employees. The underclass group is referred to chronically unemployed people who have no ongoing relationships to the mainstream economy. This groups is made up of 9% of the population who are briefly employed, and those who are dependent on public assistance and those who earn money off the books and are not taxed or monitored by the government.
This relates to the reading because it talks about how inequality causes death. Inequality kills because the worse off in the United States are not well off by world standards. This is because people with lower income groups tend to not ave enough money for health care cost, education, and safe environments which leads then to have higher death rates than high class groups who have more tan enough money to spend on the health and education. The reading says "It takes more income to achieve a given life expectancy in a rich country like the United States than it does to achieve the same life expectancy in a less affluent country." This basically is saying that the United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world but instead of sharing our resources with one another to help each other get to the same group we abide by the stratification system. The article says that inequality is one of the top causes of death because of "equal opportunity killers". This is because they tend to strike poor people more than the rich people because they are less educated.
People of lower income groups tend to have most health problems such as stree, heart disease blood pressure and more health problems in general. This is because they do not have enough money to get the proper medications or resources to talk to a specialist so they end up getting more diseases then what they started and eventully dyeing. This is why I agree with the article when it says that although we dont see inequality on a medical chart as a cause of death, it is the main reason behind immediate causes of death. Also high levels of social cohesion societies are associated with good health outcomes because they are more likely to be active in their communities, reducing social isolation, a known health risk factor.
For example I can relate to this because compared to the lifestyle on Manhattan most of the other borough's do not have the same recreational activities. I live in Brooklyn, and the park by my house is called Sunset park. It has a play ground that is all dirty and messed up, they haven't fixed it up in years, theirs graffiti on the slides, when you go to the basketball courts its filled with gang affiliated kids who are doing no good, so it makes me not want to take my son to that park. The quality of this park just shows that we live in a lower class neighbor hood and no one comes to fix it up, it looks the same as it did 10 years ago when I went as a kid. On the other hand, being that I go to school in Manhattan I rake my son to the park up the street of BMCC by the ferry, because that park is beautiful. They have a separate section for each age group, everything is renewed they have a nice sand area, a water area with sprinklers. Its just a safe and fun environment where theres no graffiti on the equipment or gangs hovering over the park, and it makes me want to stay even longer their with my son because I know going back to my neighborhood I wont take him to that park. This is sad because I am lucky that I have knowledge about better opportunities and activities for my son. This is not good for those in my community who do not know about these parks or cant travel that far and these kids grow up deprived of going to a nice safe environment like the park, and these outside sources like the park are taken away from them and thats were all the health and risk factors come in. Even the government or mayors of our cities choose not to place nice equipment in these areas for fear that properties will get damaged by people who don't care and this effects the children who just want to have the same active opportunities as children who live in nice areas because they are wealthy and have ascribed statuses.
Th article says that social inequality and health is associated with high-calorie, high- fat diets, and lack of physical activity etc. which is more prevalent among the least affluent people in rich societies. This relates also to the fact that people who are not wealthy cannot afford healthy food, or extra activities such as sports because they cannot afford it. This is an inequality that affects the lower class groups and gives them inequality with the upper class groups who can afford all of these necessities. This is how inequality causes death.
In relation to class inequality, is the video People like us. This video talks about how people really care about what other's think of them. Everyone tries to be better than the other, and I like how one of the guys says its like never ending high school even through adulthood. He also says that back then the rich didn't want their kids going to school with black kids but not they don't want their kids going to school with poor kids. Many folks care about projecting their status. For example the video says that people wouldn't mind buying thing with italian names that they don't even know the definition of but they evoke a concept of sophistication and class. Everyone wants to have a name for themselves, and look as if they are high status. The way some of the people in the video talk like typical stuck up rich folks who think they are better then someone because they have money. But fact of the matter is that some of them were ascribed to these lifestyles. They are just supporting class inequality. This relates to a part of chapter 9 when it talks about the ideology that justifies inequality. It says if you were raised in the United States then we are familiar with the common ideas that everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed (but it does not guarantee success). Success is based on merit (not on wealth, family ties, or other special statuses). People can achieve success through individual ability and hard work. This ideology is imprinted into all of us middle class - lower class groups so that we can think we have the same chances of becoming upper class if we try. Even though we have disadvantages, the wealthy dont want us to know that we are never going to be wealthy (atleast not the majority of us) because they believe in the stratification system. This video shows us a view of the upper class mentality and how they perceive the lower class. As well as it opens our mind sets to think of what we need to do to gain better knowledge to better ourselves.
This is something we can all relate to because ever since we were kids our parents and teachers and family have trained us to think that if we want to get far in life we need to go to school, and college to get a degree to make money and etc. Which is true, but for that we need money and that already is a disadvantage the lower and middle class has against the upperclass. I mean we may have financial aid but we can't go to Yale or Harvard with that. Which is why I enjoyed this video because it kind of gives you a reality check to the way America works. Its like the book says, the United states justifies ideology and makes us think that theres nothing wrong with the way we live in our class systems. So if you think about it we all contribute the the class inequality, just by conforming to it.
1. The unequal distribution of valuable resources.
2. Distinctive groups that makeup the various strata in society.
3. An ideology, or system of beliefs, that explains and justifies the existence of inequality.
The high class groups is made up of the capitalist class which is people who are wealthy. The text book defines wealth as the value of financial assets such as saint, real estate, stocks, and bonds, minus any outstanding debt. This class is made up of about 1% of the U.S population, who has inherited money from generation to generation, people who own companies and have invested and etc. The middle class is a group that contributes specialized knowledge and expertise to the economy. This group usually obtains college professions, and has essential resources. This group is made up of 45% of the population, their occupations tends to be schoolteachers low-level managers, social workers. The working class is like the middle class but they usually make a product or provide a service and earn hourly wages. This group is made up of 45% of the population such as mechanics, electricians and technicians and service employees. The underclass group is referred to chronically unemployed people who have no ongoing relationships to the mainstream economy. This groups is made up of 9% of the population who are briefly employed, and those who are dependent on public assistance and those who earn money off the books and are not taxed or monitored by the government.
This relates to the reading because it talks about how inequality causes death. Inequality kills because the worse off in the United States are not well off by world standards. This is because people with lower income groups tend to not ave enough money for health care cost, education, and safe environments which leads then to have higher death rates than high class groups who have more tan enough money to spend on the health and education. The reading says "It takes more income to achieve a given life expectancy in a rich country like the United States than it does to achieve the same life expectancy in a less affluent country." This basically is saying that the United States is one of the wealthiest countries in the world but instead of sharing our resources with one another to help each other get to the same group we abide by the stratification system. The article says that inequality is one of the top causes of death because of "equal opportunity killers". This is because they tend to strike poor people more than the rich people because they are less educated.
People of lower income groups tend to have most health problems such as stree, heart disease blood pressure and more health problems in general. This is because they do not have enough money to get the proper medications or resources to talk to a specialist so they end up getting more diseases then what they started and eventully dyeing. This is why I agree with the article when it says that although we dont see inequality on a medical chart as a cause of death, it is the main reason behind immediate causes of death. Also high levels of social cohesion societies are associated with good health outcomes because they are more likely to be active in their communities, reducing social isolation, a known health risk factor.
For example I can relate to this because compared to the lifestyle on Manhattan most of the other borough's do not have the same recreational activities. I live in Brooklyn, and the park by my house is called Sunset park. It has a play ground that is all dirty and messed up, they haven't fixed it up in years, theirs graffiti on the slides, when you go to the basketball courts its filled with gang affiliated kids who are doing no good, so it makes me not want to take my son to that park. The quality of this park just shows that we live in a lower class neighbor hood and no one comes to fix it up, it looks the same as it did 10 years ago when I went as a kid. On the other hand, being that I go to school in Manhattan I rake my son to the park up the street of BMCC by the ferry, because that park is beautiful. They have a separate section for each age group, everything is renewed they have a nice sand area, a water area with sprinklers. Its just a safe and fun environment where theres no graffiti on the equipment or gangs hovering over the park, and it makes me want to stay even longer their with my son because I know going back to my neighborhood I wont take him to that park. This is sad because I am lucky that I have knowledge about better opportunities and activities for my son. This is not good for those in my community who do not know about these parks or cant travel that far and these kids grow up deprived of going to a nice safe environment like the park, and these outside sources like the park are taken away from them and thats were all the health and risk factors come in. Even the government or mayors of our cities choose not to place nice equipment in these areas for fear that properties will get damaged by people who don't care and this effects the children who just want to have the same active opportunities as children who live in nice areas because they are wealthy and have ascribed statuses.
Th article says that social inequality and health is associated with high-calorie, high- fat diets, and lack of physical activity etc. which is more prevalent among the least affluent people in rich societies. This relates also to the fact that people who are not wealthy cannot afford healthy food, or extra activities such as sports because they cannot afford it. This is an inequality that affects the lower class groups and gives them inequality with the upper class groups who can afford all of these necessities. This is how inequality causes death.
In relation to class inequality, is the video People like us. This video talks about how people really care about what other's think of them. Everyone tries to be better than the other, and I like how one of the guys says its like never ending high school even through adulthood. He also says that back then the rich didn't want their kids going to school with black kids but not they don't want their kids going to school with poor kids. Many folks care about projecting their status. For example the video says that people wouldn't mind buying thing with italian names that they don't even know the definition of but they evoke a concept of sophistication and class. Everyone wants to have a name for themselves, and look as if they are high status. The way some of the people in the video talk like typical stuck up rich folks who think they are better then someone because they have money. But fact of the matter is that some of them were ascribed to these lifestyles. They are just supporting class inequality. This relates to a part of chapter 9 when it talks about the ideology that justifies inequality. It says if you were raised in the United States then we are familiar with the common ideas that everyone has an equal opportunity to succeed (but it does not guarantee success). Success is based on merit (not on wealth, family ties, or other special statuses). People can achieve success through individual ability and hard work. This ideology is imprinted into all of us middle class - lower class groups so that we can think we have the same chances of becoming upper class if we try. Even though we have disadvantages, the wealthy dont want us to know that we are never going to be wealthy (atleast not the majority of us) because they believe in the stratification system. This video shows us a view of the upper class mentality and how they perceive the lower class. As well as it opens our mind sets to think of what we need to do to gain better knowledge to better ourselves.
This is something we can all relate to because ever since we were kids our parents and teachers and family have trained us to think that if we want to get far in life we need to go to school, and college to get a degree to make money and etc. Which is true, but for that we need money and that already is a disadvantage the lower and middle class has against the upperclass. I mean we may have financial aid but we can't go to Yale or Harvard with that. Which is why I enjoyed this video because it kind of gives you a reality check to the way America works. Its like the book says, the United states justifies ideology and makes us think that theres nothing wrong with the way we live in our class systems. So if you think about it we all contribute the the class inequality, just by conforming to it.
Monday, May 6, 2013
Blog 7 - Deviance
In our class we spoke about deviance and how society applies these rules of norms to our society. IN chapter 8 of the text book, Deviance is defined as a behavior that does not conform to basic cultural norms and expectations. We see deviance everyday, for example stealing is an everyday act that we see everyday. When I was 7 years old I went shopping with my mom to Macy's, I remember going to the makeup section and seeing a packet of Lip Smackers, I opened them and put them in my pocket making sure my mom didn't see because I knew she would get mad since she told me she couldn't buy them, once we were leaving to the car one of the chap sticks fell and she saw it and she made me march back into Macy's and give them to the lady at the register, I was so humiliated but I learned my lesson. In the text it explains that what defines a deviant act depends on the particular social context in which the behavior occurs or a persons lives and on the power of those who label it. This means that society as a whole shares a collective conscience which is the shared Norms, beliefs, and values in a community. For example back in the days it was normal for woman to get beat by a man, to not work, or have the same rights as men to be exact, but now in the 20th century all though women still aren't exactly as equal as men, it is not in our "norms" to let a man put his hands on a women. Women now are able to get an education and work. If these norms are not met they are punishable in our generation by jail, criminal records, law, and even stigma. Stigma is the shame attachment to a behavior or status that is considered socially unacceptable or discrediting. As domestic violence is looked down on men, women get stigmatized as well with marriages or even relationships. This weekend I was watching Think Like A Man and I remember the women blaming themselves for not being able to get a man. One of the women asked the other what they were doing wrong and what could they do to find a good man. But the thing is that its not always someones fault for not getting a partner. Most of the time that is how men label women as needy, or sexual objects because they know that women's goals are usually to get a man get married and start a family, which is probably why men don't change because they look for women to change. With this comes the Labeling Theory which argues that deviance is the result of how other's interpret a behavior and individuals who are labeled deviant often internalize this judgement as part of their self-identity. An example of this is women themselves, we know that through media we are viewed as sexual objects for men, and we let this become our identity. If we have nice bodies were okay with what the media says and when we don't look like what the media says we should we feel that were big and thats part of us. But sometimes women become obsessed with playing the part which would fall under Secondary Deviance which is a behavior that is a response to the negative consequence of labeling. For example women are constantly labeled as sexual objects so they were provocative and revealing clothing and we constantly are worrying about our images and how men see us. Another form of deviance that the text book explains is Medicalization of Deviance which is the designation of a deviant behavior as an illness that can be treated by medical professionals. For example when I was on the train today I saw a guy come in with his mom and he kept shouting out the stops of the train and repeating what the conductor would say. At first everyone thought he was being weird but then I realized that he had to have some type of biological disorder. People then associated his deviance to pity and with this comes a lifelong stigma that this person is different because of genetics and theres nothing they can do about it. People tend to avoid these kind of deviances regardless because they do not want to be viewed as different.
In the reading of Positive Functions of the Undeserving Poor: Uses of the Underclass in America talks about how the poor is seen through the eyes of society. It explains why the criminal and deviant behavior among the poor is largely poverty related rather than the product of free choice based on distinctive values, the undeservingness of the poor is and ancient stereotype that exaggerates the actual dangers that stem from the poor, poverty-related deviance is not neccessarily harmful just because it does not accord with mainstream norms, the notion of the undeservingness survives because of the positive functions it has for the better-off population, and the only way to eliminate both this notion and the function is to eliminate poverty. Gans describes the functions of the undeserving poor in five sets of positive functions which are: micro social, economic, normative-cultural, political, and macro social. In the micro social he talks about how the poor are stereotyped into people who are welfare recipients and that they tend to do violant acts and are too weak to object, they are often times accused of causing social problems that they didnt cause but they are used for blame. In the economic function he talks about how poor people who don't finish school or are convitcs tend to be denied work and are stereotyped into being lazy and not able to work which often times gives them no other choice but to go back to their criminal occupations. This leads to immagrants having room to work for exploited wages and being threatened with deportations. Banishing the poor from work leads them to sell illegal drugs, whose supply is demanded most from the whites who are wealthy. In the reading one thing that stood ut to me was when it said "Since the undeserving poor are thought to be dangerous or improperly socialized, their behavior either has to be modified so that they act in socially approved ways, or they have to be isolated from the deserving sector of society." In the Normative function it talks about the class system and how it defines who is deserving and leaving the poor as undeserving which is why people strive for the upward mobility. It also talks about how Durkheim explained deviance to be played in a positive social role. For example if the undeserving poor is viewed as lazy, that is the image they reaffirm. The political function is about how appointed officials who are supposed to take care of the problems of the poor push them aside and take advantage of there inferiority to their intelligence. In fact the undeserving poor are blamed for both poverty and political will. The poor cant vote or choose not to because they know politicians wont listen to their demands. Poor people are stigmatized to live in underclass areas which end up being torn down to make room for high taxpayers while other areas are used to isolate stigmatized poor people by selecting them as locations for homeless shelters, halfway houses for mentally ill and ex-convicts. In the macro social functions it talks about how policies and agencies haven risen to set up to help the poor economically become deserving but actually this does not help them become free of stigma. The deserving judge the poor and their children with anticipatory stigmatization by assuming they'll be unable to learn, or work. These organizations that try to help the undeserving poor attract less well-trained and qualified staff than high class clients and because they are undeserving they become less important in choosing staff. In conclusion I think this article basically talks about how society has placed and labeled the poor as undeserving which is not right, because we do this they actually become secondary deviant and act out the way people label them as which rises our violent and crime rates, because the poor don't have any other way of making a form of income if they cant get good or decent jobs they turn to stealing and illegal ways. What the article wants us to do is to try and help the undeserving becomes deserving so that everyone can becomes equal and reduce our crime rates.
In the reading of Positive Functions of the Undeserving Poor: Uses of the Underclass in America talks about how the poor is seen through the eyes of society. It explains why the criminal and deviant behavior among the poor is largely poverty related rather than the product of free choice based on distinctive values, the undeservingness of the poor is and ancient stereotype that exaggerates the actual dangers that stem from the poor, poverty-related deviance is not neccessarily harmful just because it does not accord with mainstream norms, the notion of the undeservingness survives because of the positive functions it has for the better-off population, and the only way to eliminate both this notion and the function is to eliminate poverty. Gans describes the functions of the undeserving poor in five sets of positive functions which are: micro social, economic, normative-cultural, political, and macro social. In the micro social he talks about how the poor are stereotyped into people who are welfare recipients and that they tend to do violant acts and are too weak to object, they are often times accused of causing social problems that they didnt cause but they are used for blame. In the economic function he talks about how poor people who don't finish school or are convitcs tend to be denied work and are stereotyped into being lazy and not able to work which often times gives them no other choice but to go back to their criminal occupations. This leads to immagrants having room to work for exploited wages and being threatened with deportations. Banishing the poor from work leads them to sell illegal drugs, whose supply is demanded most from the whites who are wealthy. In the reading one thing that stood ut to me was when it said "Since the undeserving poor are thought to be dangerous or improperly socialized, their behavior either has to be modified so that they act in socially approved ways, or they have to be isolated from the deserving sector of society." In the Normative function it talks about the class system and how it defines who is deserving and leaving the poor as undeserving which is why people strive for the upward mobility. It also talks about how Durkheim explained deviance to be played in a positive social role. For example if the undeserving poor is viewed as lazy, that is the image they reaffirm. The political function is about how appointed officials who are supposed to take care of the problems of the poor push them aside and take advantage of there inferiority to their intelligence. In fact the undeserving poor are blamed for both poverty and political will. The poor cant vote or choose not to because they know politicians wont listen to their demands. Poor people are stigmatized to live in underclass areas which end up being torn down to make room for high taxpayers while other areas are used to isolate stigmatized poor people by selecting them as locations for homeless shelters, halfway houses for mentally ill and ex-convicts. In the macro social functions it talks about how policies and agencies haven risen to set up to help the poor economically become deserving but actually this does not help them become free of stigma. The deserving judge the poor and their children with anticipatory stigmatization by assuming they'll be unable to learn, or work. These organizations that try to help the undeserving poor attract less well-trained and qualified staff than high class clients and because they are undeserving they become less important in choosing staff. In conclusion I think this article basically talks about how society has placed and labeled the poor as undeserving which is not right, because we do this they actually become secondary deviant and act out the way people label them as which rises our violent and crime rates, because the poor don't have any other way of making a form of income if they cant get good or decent jobs they turn to stealing and illegal ways. What the article wants us to do is to try and help the undeserving becomes deserving so that everyone can becomes equal and reduce our crime rates.
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Blog 6 - Socialization
In the reading Parents' Socialization of Children By: D. Terri Heath, is about how although their are differences in parenting styles there are more similarities of them in different cultures. The main point is that parent involvement and parent expectations are to have good behaviors from there children. Whether it be in China were they encourage independence through inductive discipline which is reasoning and using persuasion methods even if the child does something to make them very angry. Or in Mexican American subcultures where they use corporal punishment and verbal reasoning. Japan, where they expect obedience, and Israel who emphasis on individualism. The overall context is that balance and interaction of parental control, power, and support result in a particular child behavior. As well as the quality of time spent with their children is more important than quantity, because parents serve as powerful socialization agents in the development of their children's personalities.
The second point the reading makes is about parental class influences which describes differences in how home environments have a significant impact on how children will excel academically. The relevant measures of this is through housing conditions, proficiency in the dominant language, and the demands placed on children's labor in cultures classes. For example high class families have parents who encourage children to invest more time helping them in academic activities, and hold greater academic aspirations for them; and children who exhibit higher reading scores, have greater academic motivation, and greater self-esteem which often result in higher academic performances. Some examples of this is in India, whose status and wealth, considered the education of their children a privilege and yet its the higher status families who have significantly greater academic achievements because children have experienced parent-child interactions. In Thailand family background influences the school performance of youth which is associated with a greater number of modern attributes of their home, congruence between the language of home and instruction, and the less demand of child labor by the parents, which demonstrates how class status is associated with academic success. In Black and White families, children with highly educated mother spent more time learning activities. In South Africa maternal and paternal aspirations for academic achievement increased the child's academic performance. This shows us how the socioeconomic status of parent-child interactions, parental education, and parental encouragement of success demonstrates positive effects on children academic performances.
In whole this reading shows us that their are more similarities than differences in cultures parenting styles with all the same goal, to enhance positive child behavior.
In relation to quantity versus quality is the reading The Retro Wife By: Lisa Miller. In summary this reading is about how mothers are now going back to their feminist way as "stay at home moms". In the past we saw how moms stayed home and did the domestic work such as cleaning, cooking and taking care of the kids. But whose to say that thats the ideal way? Or the proper way of raising good kids? Now in out century you see most moms pursuing a career just as the male would and pick up their kids from either daycare, school, or come home to a babysitter. But as I was reading the article it was explaining how younger women are more open to the idea that there might exist evolved psychological gender differences. Meaning that moms tend to do a better job in the domestic work and childrearing than are fathers. In regards to this only about 19% of men spend there time cleaning or doing laundry and spend about 26 minutes a day with there children. Woman are now conforming to this traditional belief, which is not new. For me in my opinion I can not deny that I believe in the traditional theory that the woman is better at the domestic work than the man. I am a mom, a student, and a part time worker. I can say that my son is in daycare at the time I am in school and with his father when I work. Which is why my point on quantity versus quality is important for me. Its not about the amount of time we spent with our children its about the quality and what we do in that time for them. I have a 3-year old son and when I am with him he cleans and helps me cook, we read together play video games, or go to the park. I make it my obligation to interact positively with him and show him things. I do a lot as far as tradition goes as well, I clean and cook and raise my child, but so does his father. As a man he does his traditional work such as "going to work and bringing home the bacon" but he helps domestically as well. When I work or am at school he cleans, does laundry, and watches our son. Many woman do not have that which is why a lot of them quit their jobs to stay at home like the woman in this story who had a degree in social work. I can relate to this reading and understand it, but I am also aware of the changes we need to make in gender stereotyping. Men can do just as much as woman, and woman can do anything a man can do. Whether one can do it better is another thing but its important to know that we all are equal, even if society wont conform to it.
In the video Man Box they explain to us about how agents of socialization create a mans persona. In the video the guy talks about how boys are not born as men, they are taught to be the way they are. From the minute were born girls are rapped in the pink blanket and boys are rapped in a blue blanket. The guidelines that men abide by are defined in the man box. Any man who brakes these rules, is viewed as a woman in a negative way. Such as being called "a bitch, a wussy, a sissy, a fag etc." A man fears getting "out of the box" this is how a man is raised. It all starts like I said the minute we are born our first agents in life are our parents (family), then school, media, peers, work, religion etc. With this the text book says the life-course perspective on socialization focuses on look at how age, time, and place shape social identities and experiences over a lifetime. This is associated with the experiences we get from every agent that influences our identity. The video talks about how men are supposed to be viewed as these powerful people who have more control over women, and if they don't live up to these standard they are demeaned as these negative female labels which is sad. I can say that we have all been victims of this or supporters because for an example I have a three-year old son and even when I take him the store and he picks up a barbie doll I tell him NO thats a girls toy. Without even thinking about it I do and it just funny how we have all been conformed to thinking whats appropriate for girls and whats for boys.
In the video Killing us softly I saw how media is misogenistic. The video talks about how all we see in advertisement is how women are objectified by men as sex objects. The media is always telling women that they are never beautiful enough and that is seen in commercials about how to loose weight, and that girls should get plastic surgery to look like these models on t.v which I mean just the name alone "models" tells girls that this is who they need to look up to. In all reality, its impossible to look like these girls, even those "models" don't look like that in real life. To be on t.v most of them had to have some type of botox or plastic surgery, not to mention that everything on t.v is photoshopped to look PERFECT. In the text book it points out how media has become an increasingly influential agent of socialization. For example the text says that for most of human history, children learned morals and values from the myths and other stories they heard from their families. Today, children receive these lessons from commercial media companies whose primary interest is selling products and socializing people to be consumers. This relates clearly to the video because it talks about how woman are objectified as objects by men since birth. This even relates to the video Man box because that even explains how men are supposed to always have power and control and are supposed to be higher than woman and that is exactly what media does. Media and advertisements sells woman's bodies and portrays them to be made only for men. Based on the society we live in, as children we are taught the differences in our genders. Boys are supposed to be masculine, powerful, and have a high status. Girls are taught that they exist for the male viewer, and that they have to be beautiful to have a man's attention.
In general these videos and readings relate to socialization because they are the outcomes of the agents that influence our identities. Our families, peers, school, environment, and media all contribute to the way our cycle of life continues. We raise our boys to be "men", and our girls to be "women" whatever that may mean to our own cultures and family values as well as our beliefs maybe.
The second point the reading makes is about parental class influences which describes differences in how home environments have a significant impact on how children will excel academically. The relevant measures of this is through housing conditions, proficiency in the dominant language, and the demands placed on children's labor in cultures classes. For example high class families have parents who encourage children to invest more time helping them in academic activities, and hold greater academic aspirations for them; and children who exhibit higher reading scores, have greater academic motivation, and greater self-esteem which often result in higher academic performances. Some examples of this is in India, whose status and wealth, considered the education of their children a privilege and yet its the higher status families who have significantly greater academic achievements because children have experienced parent-child interactions. In Thailand family background influences the school performance of youth which is associated with a greater number of modern attributes of their home, congruence between the language of home and instruction, and the less demand of child labor by the parents, which demonstrates how class status is associated with academic success. In Black and White families, children with highly educated mother spent more time learning activities. In South Africa maternal and paternal aspirations for academic achievement increased the child's academic performance. This shows us how the socioeconomic status of parent-child interactions, parental education, and parental encouragement of success demonstrates positive effects on children academic performances.
In whole this reading shows us that their are more similarities than differences in cultures parenting styles with all the same goal, to enhance positive child behavior.
In relation to quantity versus quality is the reading The Retro Wife By: Lisa Miller. In summary this reading is about how mothers are now going back to their feminist way as "stay at home moms". In the past we saw how moms stayed home and did the domestic work such as cleaning, cooking and taking care of the kids. But whose to say that thats the ideal way? Or the proper way of raising good kids? Now in out century you see most moms pursuing a career just as the male would and pick up their kids from either daycare, school, or come home to a babysitter. But as I was reading the article it was explaining how younger women are more open to the idea that there might exist evolved psychological gender differences. Meaning that moms tend to do a better job in the domestic work and childrearing than are fathers. In regards to this only about 19% of men spend there time cleaning or doing laundry and spend about 26 minutes a day with there children. Woman are now conforming to this traditional belief, which is not new. For me in my opinion I can not deny that I believe in the traditional theory that the woman is better at the domestic work than the man. I am a mom, a student, and a part time worker. I can say that my son is in daycare at the time I am in school and with his father when I work. Which is why my point on quantity versus quality is important for me. Its not about the amount of time we spent with our children its about the quality and what we do in that time for them. I have a 3-year old son and when I am with him he cleans and helps me cook, we read together play video games, or go to the park. I make it my obligation to interact positively with him and show him things. I do a lot as far as tradition goes as well, I clean and cook and raise my child, but so does his father. As a man he does his traditional work such as "going to work and bringing home the bacon" but he helps domestically as well. When I work or am at school he cleans, does laundry, and watches our son. Many woman do not have that which is why a lot of them quit their jobs to stay at home like the woman in this story who had a degree in social work. I can relate to this reading and understand it, but I am also aware of the changes we need to make in gender stereotyping. Men can do just as much as woman, and woman can do anything a man can do. Whether one can do it better is another thing but its important to know that we all are equal, even if society wont conform to it.
In the video Killing us softly I saw how media is misogenistic. The video talks about how all we see in advertisement is how women are objectified by men as sex objects. The media is always telling women that they are never beautiful enough and that is seen in commercials about how to loose weight, and that girls should get plastic surgery to look like these models on t.v which I mean just the name alone "models" tells girls that this is who they need to look up to. In all reality, its impossible to look like these girls, even those "models" don't look like that in real life. To be on t.v most of them had to have some type of botox or plastic surgery, not to mention that everything on t.v is photoshopped to look PERFECT. In the text book it points out how media has become an increasingly influential agent of socialization. For example the text says that for most of human history, children learned morals and values from the myths and other stories they heard from their families. Today, children receive these lessons from commercial media companies whose primary interest is selling products and socializing people to be consumers. This relates clearly to the video because it talks about how woman are objectified as objects by men since birth. This even relates to the video Man box because that even explains how men are supposed to always have power and control and are supposed to be higher than woman and that is exactly what media does. Media and advertisements sells woman's bodies and portrays them to be made only for men. Based on the society we live in, as children we are taught the differences in our genders. Boys are supposed to be masculine, powerful, and have a high status. Girls are taught that they exist for the male viewer, and that they have to be beautiful to have a man's attention.
In general these videos and readings relate to socialization because they are the outcomes of the agents that influence our identities. Our families, peers, school, environment, and media all contribute to the way our cycle of life continues. We raise our boys to be "men", and our girls to be "women" whatever that may mean to our own cultures and family values as well as our beliefs maybe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)