Race & Ethnicity / Race et Ethnicité

The question is asked virtually everywhere; “what’s your race?” “Ethnic background and even, “where are you from?” That last question may offend some and others might take it in the literal term, but one thing these questions have in common is identity. For this blog we had to choose a pertinent reading and summarize it here. I chose Charles A. Gallagher’s “Color-blind Privilege: The Social and Political Functions of Erasing the Color-line in Post-Race America.” The article is pretty interesting, it speaks about race and ethnicity and how the media and the market helps further establish colorblindness.

            Colorblindness is defined as the result of a unified society where blacks and whites don’t just see each other as the color of their skin but instead as equals. You may ask yourself, “EQUAL???” with all the inequality that exists in America but the article argues that everyone, Blacks, Spanish, Asians, and other groups have an equal opportunity at success; equal opportunity in housing, education, and career. Furthermore we acknowledge how the use of the media and the market affect this equality. We all buy products that everyone uses—popular brands like Pantene shampoo and Johnson & Johnson. Colorblindness exists within these brands and others because they do not just limit themselves to just Blacks or Asians but advertise their products a specific way that attracts everyone; everyone uses name-brand clothes without questioning the ethnic origin (or racial origin) of the company. The same is said for music, for example Eminem a famous rapper who just so happens to be white and black rapper “50-cent” both from different backgrounds but sing the same music genre—that’s colorblindness. Charles argues that colorblindness is a depiction of U.S. race relations serving to maintain white privilege by negating inequality. Charles interviewed many people to get their ideas and found out that the majority white population believe that blacks are equal, that their chances are making out in the real world is the same as it would be for them. During these interviews an interviewee said that blacks have equal opportunities, if not better, to get ahead and succeed but that they do not have the guidance that he received from his parents but that overall they can get an education, they have easy access to funding—he claimed to not have qualified for financial aid—and the same work opportunities are there. So Mr. Gallagher asks, "how is colorblindness linked to privilege?" The color-blind perspective. This perspective removes from any personal thought along with any public discussions, any taint or suggestion of white suppremacy or "white guilt" while STILL legitimizing the existing social, political and economic arrangements which privilege whites, thus insinuating that class and culture, and not institutional racism, are responsible for social inequality. Then the article ones on to all about opportunity and how it has no color, further backing up my previous statement that public institutions do not base their opinions on the color of your skin but on your knowledge and competitiveness.

         Color is ultimately a choice by mind, an ascribed thing by nature. Chris Rock once pointed out that the greatest golfer, Tiger Woods, is black and the greatest rapper, Eminem, is white. By stating that color is a choice it is to say that you listen to all types of music be cause you "like" it; by listening to Jazz or rap, tango, or Arabic music you're not saying to yourself, "this is black music" because is music. The same with a person and colorblindness through the media and markets display that. I can use the world famous Apple iPhone, it may come in two colors (black and white) but it doesn't insinuates that a black or white, Asian or Arab, Spanish or native Americans should buy the left one and the others the right one. The new generation of humans are viewing the race-line erased by saying that everyone has equal opportunities. Charles stated that at the workplace your application for employment should not be denied because of your race, skin color, or your ethnic background and since laws were put in place making it illegal, employers can't really do that; if they do, they would have a lawsuit against them. So it is political asertations that help promote colorblindness. A student said in an interview, "if there is any time to be black in America it's now." At its core, the color-blind philosophy holds that racial minorities can succeed if they rid themselves of any belief, notion, that their race entitles them to special treatment or race-bases entitlement. Race symbols as symbols of racism is common, among the black population. An example was given with a t-shirt where a black man can wear a plain t-shirt but once the image of Malcom X is displayed, it may be a sense of pride for him or her, he can be their heroes but it still signifies racism in an era where that is in the past, it doesn't happen anymore and those should be historical facts not broadly displayed. It is said that because of past history between blacks and whites that now it looks like more freedom is given to minority groups and the whites are quieted down, thus implying that equality is never a plane field but that it shifts disproportionately. 

         I liked this article because it helps you see the "today" in a way that you would have not thought it to be. All the talks about inequality is based on the way a person is brought up. The majority group are brought up in fine places with all these opportunities, they see that the opportunity can be grasped by not just them, but everyone else just that everyone else doesn't do so; while the minority groups tend to struggle a bit because they are disadvantaged one way or another, whether it be that they don't speak the national language, they aren't able to read or write. It still doesn't justify the facts that even though services provided in our country indeed is equal it isn't distributed the same and inequality still exists—much like survival of the fittest, only few survive.
      As part of this blog we were also required to watch a video called, "Race: The Power of Illusion-Episode one" and what the video was about was telling us about race. A group of students were participating in this science lab where they each took samples of their DNA and compared them with each other's samples. This was a diverse group learning about race. Each student were told to tell us who they think their DNA's will match completely and many said the names of the other student who was either from the same background as well as their skin tone. "I'll probably be a 100% match with her because she's of African-American decent and I am too, you know 'black.'" What these students failed to realize is that we're all alike by 99% of our DNA structure. The video also went on to describe how race came to be, how it was an invention. The human body was specifically and scientifically studied to find differences between race and many scientists tried to find genetic differences to attach race to. The size of the skull between a black human and a white human, that along with all of the organs imaginable, including the brain. ("Color of a black man's brain is slightly darker.") This video helps bring to light that race was something that was created 3 centuries ago, that because of this invention we have inequalities among our cities and countries. Once the lab results came in for the group of students who submitted their DNA's came in they then compared their lab results with the other student they had initially said they'd be a 100% match to and discovered that they weren't exactly similar to the person with the same qualities but that they were genetically similar to someone else. They then compared the samples from someone in Africa and Asia and discovered that the whole group had similarities to someone in Africa, thus bringing to conclusion that there is one of everyone in Africa should the whole population around the globe cease to exists. We all originated from Africa, we're all the same with NO race. The only thing that we can agree on that we have difference in is our culture, certain things we do because it's been done for centuries where our ancestors grew up in but these classifications of "race" are non-existent because just as the article above stated, we do not classify any object and place them under a race because there is no such thing as race for objects or animals, it's made up benefitting one specific group of people.  

       This reading and video can be compared to Chapter 10 in our text books on Race & Ethnicity because the book covers race as a widely perceived category as sharing (social) significant physical characteristic, such as eye shape or skin color. The chapter tells us about the differences between race and ethnicity and how they aren't alike, you can have the same ethnic background but be from two different races which is very common in Central and Spanish ("Latin") America where there is a mix of Europeans, Native Indians, African, and Asian decent but all share the same ethnic background such as the cuisine, clothing preference, and language. Race and ethnicity is everywhere and asked all the time, when filling out an application and even when meeting a friend or potential significan other, it's always asked and the chapter summarizes in a way that race is something that was invented—sometimes you may not belong under all of the categories listed. It talks about inequality and how in an equal seeming nation, the distribution and allocation of resources is still unequal, displaying a chart in housing, income, and population with a 4-year college degree. Overall it can be said that anytime you're asked for your race/ ethnicity even if its for good causes inequality still tends to find its way around. There will always be a majority group stepping down on the minority group even if there is a turnaround where the minority is now the majority and the majority is the minority inequality will still disadvantage those. In a post-civil rights society prejudice, discrimination, and other types of oppressive behavior can be hidden or, in turn, produced by support of color-blind policies.

Gender and Sexuality / Genre et la Sexualité

Gender and sexuality is such a broad topic that is everywhere we look. It's on our billboards on our advertisements and in our books. It's on applications for employment, school, and lisensing. The reading I chose was "Understanding Sexual Orientation," by Alfred C. Kinsey Wardell B. Pomeroy and Clyde E. Martin. This reading caught my attention because its title had gave off and indication that sexuality is not yet understood. The reading was about sexuality and how there is heterosexual and homosexual, along with bisexuals. Most of the population is either homosexual or heterosexual. It specifies the distinct characteristics that unfortunately labels a man heterosexual and homosexual and this relates to Chapter 11, Gender and Sexuality in a way that the whole country, if not, the whole world is male dominated. The reading was interesting because it only spoke about the things that defined a man homosexual and barely spoke about the woman side of it and that's shows a bit of unjust between how the man is treated if he is defined homosexual, more than a woman. I believe it has to do with the fact that the world indeed is male dominated and such feminish behaviors are not to be displayed by men, maybe because the majority of men view women and their behavior as inferior.
       The chapter opens up with a story about a woman in a race in 1967, a time when the famous Boston Marathon was to be run by men, this woman named Katherine was able to "legally" participate and while running a man told her to "get out of my race!" Shoved and pushed her luckily her boyfriend was near her and allowed her to complete the race. It shows that women were inferior and although this gender issues are changing it's still visible today. The reading labeled heterosexual men as those we saw in the man-box video completely opposite to the behaviors homosexuals had and its as to say that men have two distinct populations when really there isn't. It backs up the ideology that not all things are black and white, big and small, and that nature does not deal or have a say in it. The human mind invents such categorization, gender, sexual preference, race, ethnicity—it isn't determined by Mother Nature but by us, we categorize ourselves and, thus, bear the unequalness.

Class / Classe

Inequality has been amongst us since the start of the class systems. The article I chose is "Cause of Death: Inequality" by Alejandro Ruess. The article discusses how depending on your economic standing, your health can be analyzed. Different classes of high-income are unequal with those classes of low-income. Inequality kills which ultimately lets use become aware that based on your economic status, one's health can be determined. You can agree that if you're from a middle class family you've gone regularly to the doctors, dentist, and ophthalmologist as opposed to someone from the working-class or lower-class that did go to the doctor but did not get a chance to go to the dentist or the eye doctor. It's inequality that happened then and still does today. Ruess tells us about further inequality based on race, how black men in Harlem have the same life expectancies as those men living in the Democratic Republic of Congo or Angola and black women have the same life expectancy as women in India.
       Health issues are also discussed. An interesting thing that can be viewed was how inequality is shown by the food you eat. Lower-income families do not have the disposable income to buy the more expensive healthier foods and so ate food with high fat, high sodium, and preservatives leading to health problems such as high blood pressure, diabetes, and obesity. The interesting thing was that even though this is more common among poorer families, middle-high-class might appeal to those types of food, although it is very highly unlikely. On the section, "Greater Income Inequality Goes Hand in Hand with Poorer Health" states that "the more unequal the income distribution in a country; state, or city, the lower the life expectancies for people at all income level" which suggests that people of low income living in a city or town with less income inequality have a lower mortality rate. One thing we can agree on is that although we can have a say about where our money goes, we choose not to. Even though a family may belong to the middle-class they're too busy thinking about what others think about themselves than worry about the inequality further strengthening the class system and the inequality. It's more like survival of the fittest.
        The video, "People Like Us" can be compared to the article where one man interviewed agreed that life ultimately is like high school, you constantly care about what others think. The video also discussed the views of people from all classes and how they know where they belong. High-income families have choose to drive certain cars, eat certain food, dress a certain way, and own certain things because they know that others within their class will judge them and those from lower classes do not clash with them and if so, those from the higher class act like they are better than them, they're powerful, and can do anything. The video was interesting because it showed the class system in America even though many refuse to think there is such thing when indeed it does exists. You may think that there is no class system when for example you might consider yourself part of the "99%" of Americans trying to bring to justice that "1%" of rich Americans to justice by taxing and spreading the wealth to the rest. This shows that if accurate, only 1 percent of Americans belong to the high class 89% belong within the low-middle and middle-class and about 10% belong to the low-class. The video proved that the more money affluent you are the more biased you become and like everything else, its an ascribed status instilled from birth. There is the capability for social mobility, but that capability is very difficult.  There is unequal distribution of resources within classes which relates to the text in chapter 9 "Class and global inequality" where inequality within the United States is inexplicably noticeable. Your education determines whether you get that blue collar job or proceed to a white collar one; your income levels and the way people look at you.
      Overall, inequality itself is something that we cannot get rid of, it's been around forever and even though it is dissipating, it will not fully do so. It has been said that in the early 19th century inequality was viewed as a fair thing, that those born into their unequal class would gain equality in the afterlife. Unless we all, as a whole agree on what is equal and what isn't, this division and inequality will continue. A way to change it? Investing in opportunities.

Deviance

                      It is a "normal" thing to live in a world where deviance exists. In fact, society as we know it might be as boring as staring into a blank piece of paper for an hour. By definition, deviance is a (p. 191) "behavior that does not conform to basic cultural norms and expectations." When I was a child I remember doing things that at the moment I didn't think were wrong but in fact, the action indeed was. In elementary school, fifth grade to be exact, calculators had just been distributed for my math class and fell completely in love with it so I decided to take it and so I placed it in my backpack. Looking back at the situation now makes me wonder what was I, a fifth grader, going to do with a calculator!My mother wound up finding the calculator and lecturing me and eventually I returned it. Luckily none of my friends were around to witness the return of the calculator, that would have been humiliating. This act taught me that it is not OK to "take" without someone's approval. That the norm is, your private property is yours and should not be taken away from you therefore you should not steal from others. This shows that culture and religion shaped what we know to be right and wrong.

       Acts of deviance is all around us, always. While walking to school we see deviance--that man sitting on a cardboard box on the sidewalk asking (or begging) for money, help, anything. This we view as a behavior that does not conform to the basic cultural norm and expectation. Furthermore, this man or woman solidifies the collective conscience. This is defined to be the "shared norms, beliefs, and values in a community." (Durkheim 1893/1997) Every one, you, your family members, and even I know that begging for money is not the norm. Being homeless is not the norm. Living on the streets is not the norm and that represents the collective conscience that we all share. The text tells us that "some acts of deviance generate widespread, perhaps even universal, condemnation." (191) When Pablo went to Best Buy and stole that P!nk album that he's wanted since its release date is caught, we tend to lable this deviant act as a thief, a criminal. This most often allows Pablo, along with his now low self esteem, to take these words, theif and criminal and incorporate that into his self-identity. This is known as the labeling theory. "Deviance is the result of how others interpret a behavior and that individuals who are labled deviant often internalize this judgement as part of their self-identity." (192) Irlanda shows up late to class everyday. On a Wednesday she showed up to class fourty-five minutes late and the teacher told her that she's going to be a failure in the "real world." That lable is stigma and Irlanda will now be affected by the labeling theory and this stigma. Stigma is defined to be "the shame attached to a behavior or status that is considered socially unacceptable or discrediting." These are effects of Deviant Labels.

                   The deviant acts that surround us, in fact, are not malignant. Since it is behaviors that does not conform to basic cultural norms, we view them in a negative way. The text reveals that deviant acts, although not the expectations in a culture, helps:

1. define group boundaries
2. create social solidarity
3. and is a source of innovation

   The article by Herbert J. Gans, "Positive Functions of the Undeserving Poor: Uses of the Underclass in America" tells us about how the poor is generally viewed. The reason why the criminality amongst these people is due to their economic status rather than by free will. "Judgement of the poor as undeserving are not based on evidence, but derive from a stereotype, even if, like most others, it is a stereotype with a "kernel of truth". (1) It also describes Functions of the Undeserving poor, the factors that lead to where they are. The Three Economic Factors describes how the people who've been labled "undeserving" can be banished from the formal labor market. The example they give are high school drop outs and their chance in the labor market without their high school diploma.
it finally gives a solution. That the poor stereotyped as underserving should be helped by scholars, writers and journalists. Ultimately the poor fall under the labeling theory, it becomes their self-identity and the "undeserving" feel that their place is out in the streets begging for money without stressing importance of getting out, social mobility.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

Socialization

               In this video, A Call to Men by Tony Porter, our minds are opened wider as we gain more knowledge about the "man box," a box full of rules on how a man should behave, what is his property and dominance over. Mr. Porter explained his childhood with his father and the life lessons that was taught to him by his father and how he somewhat incorporated it into his son. When his son, one time, went to M. Blair crying he yelled at him, "Why are you crying?" He sent him to his room telling him to come back when he's [ready] to speak to him like a man. "Oh my god, what am I doing?" He asked himself as he noticed that what society has taught him about being a man is completely wrong. "Men have to be tough, courageous, dominating, no pain, no emotions, with the exception of anger,and definitely no fear. Women are inferior property-like and a sex object." He recalled a moment in his childhood where he was at his friend's house and he had just raped a girl (of whom he claims he didn't because she never said no, nor yes) and wanted Mr. Porter to have sex with her. He didn't but try to play it off as if he did. He claims to have seen him calling up a few guys friends and within moments his living room was filled with their guy friends all waiting to have sex with this young lady. His biggest fear was getting out of the man box. He didn't want to be seen as a wimp in front of all of his guy friends for NOT actually having sex with the girl but feel good that they think he did.
              Overall, Tony make a call to all men, that it is OK for there for be equality, it is OK to have girlfriends who are just friends and nothing more, that it is OK to have feelings and emotions, that it is OK to be whole, "that my liberation as a man is tied to your liberation as a woman." Mr. Porter recalled once asking a young boy in a sports team about how he would feel if the coach told him, "you play like a girl!" He was expecting an answer more along the lines of, "sad, embarrassed" but instead he got, "I'd be devastated." If men are "devastated" about being called a girl, what, he asked, do they think (feel) about girls? We see that this way of thinking, this "man box" we've become more aware of is drilled, almost forced, into boy's head thus leading to violence and powering over women us abusing them. What's the solution? To exit, break out of this mentality.
       Women have been targeted as sexual objects by not only men, but by advertising companies. In Killing us softly we come to know that the main purpose of Ads are to sell something. A company once advertised, "'In your face, all over the place'," implying that it had the power to advertise anywhere. They do sell products but what do they tell us about women? They're often used to sell product and women wind up getting lost in advertisements. Advertisements for women often involve depicting the "perfect" woman ultimately teaching our younger generation that what is most important about a woman is how they look, thus, teaching them from an early age what it takes to be beautiful. It's purpose? Be objects—men's "property." Ultimately it leads to failure because such desired "perfection" does not exist and what is this "perfection?" A woman without any "lines, wrinkles, she never has any blemishes, (and) indeed—she has no pores." As I had mentioned before, this justifies how a woman feels and how men view women. Advertisements often incorporate women into (literally) their products thus turning them into objects. Killing us Softly also explained how women of color are also shown as "animals" in leopard skin, violent. The final message is—not fully human. This objectification is a huge form of dehumanizing women, (and) "not only is she a thing but a part of a thing that is focused on." All this perfection leads to change in how women act as well as how they physically look. Breast surgery implants material that limits sensibility doesn't pleasure the woman but the man transitioning her from a subject to an object. We see in this video that both men and women inhabit very different worlds. Men do not live in a world in which their bodies are routinely, constantly criticized and judged, where women do.
               As women reach adolescence they get the message that they should not be too power and take up space. Not to be full of themselves. Ads with both men and women also show how men and women differ. Boys are shown to be active, full of life and explorers while girls are shown to be passive and not doing anything. This video showed us an ad of a boy looking "tough" towards the little girl next to him. We're already teaching, showing that the boy should be tall, powerful, he's looking down at her while she looks up with a smile. We learn that this is the case in almost all of the ads with little children unless it involves race where virtually it is turned around—colored look up at the whites. Ads continue influencing women and girls ultimately telling them that they are to be beautiful, a sex object. Ultimately Advertisements show us that sex is everywhere, its a part of our culture, used to sell products. This objectification of the female body through the sensual ads depicts violence, most often tied to men manipulating tithe woman looking, again, like the dominant figure. Ads give implications that women want to have sex. This video also tells us that there are also ads that normalize battery, the physical beating of women—it is the single cause of injury to women here in America. There was an image of a woman being used as a foot rest and a man sitting on a single chair with his feet on her, another advertisement saying, "...it won't talk back, and it has no opinion...the perfect companion" with a man in a bathrobe and a woman in the background with her hands on her hips (signifying anger or aggravation on her part). Boys live in a world where they are constantly shown as perpetrators of violence. I believe that the overall lesson in this video is to teach us that human qualities are often divided, polarized, categorized "feminine" and "masculine" leading to the consistent devaluation of the feminine quality, an ad showing a man with a girls tattoo and quotes that followed "you're looking at my feminine side" causing the man to devalue anything feminine and he woman any feminine quality we wind up being half of what we are. Advertising is a powerful tool to display the very differences between femininity and masculinity. Ultimately advertisements target women, and along with "Call to men" it identifies how the woman is indeed dehumanized, thought to be an object of men by this "man box" and women taught that without beauty they'll be ignored. There is a huge inequality between men and women even though it it thought that women are equal to men in this 21st century. We still have a long way to go.
                The chapter on Socialization helps us understand better these two videos we watched. In both videos we encountered culture and how one's culture helps define what we view. Men is viewed as the superior sex and women are viewed a little less. Social interactions at home also help shape what is right and wrong and even though parents in this 21st century "think" that they are raising their sons and daughters the right way, in reality they're just fueling this huge inequality that exists between the two sexes. Tony Porter's "A Call to Men" relates to this chapter by him explaining his childhood experiences and how his father implemented certain ideologies into Mr. Porter on how a "man" should behave. This social interaction instilled in him what it takes to be a man, made Mr. Porter look at the "Self Glass". (153) This concept defined on chapter 6, "looking at self glass," as the idea that our sense of self develps as a reflection of the way we think others see us (1902). (A Looking glass is a mirror [153, Experience Sociology, First ed.]) That definition itself backs what Mr. Porter told us was the fear of getting out of the "man box." The fear of allowing other "men" look at him and think he's feminized, that it is okay to be whole and not view women as an object but as another human being.
                 Unfortunately "looking at self glass" fails and we see it in Killing Us Softly. Still unknowingly some men objectify women and the Advertising industry does it all the time. Charles Horton Cooley (1864-1929) brought the previous concept up and stated that our interactions with other humans that involves three steps:

1. We imagine our image in the eyes of others.
2. We imagine the others making some judgemet about us.
3. We experience a feeling as a result of the imagined judgement.

Women and young girls are targeted by the advertising industry and this "man box." Both of these aimed at women are still unequal even though 80% still think women are at a 50/50 par with men. Justifiable violence is the result of #3: We experience a feeling as a result of the imagined judgement.




"DIFFERENT, BUT WHY?"
Image: Evelin Elmest/iStock

To gather a few pictures to identify how both sexes are differentialized and labeled I came accross this picture of a girl and a boy yet the website's article read, "Girl Brain, Boy Brain?" A section in the article that I took out was, "Females of all ages outperform males on tests requiring the recognition of emotion or relationships among other people." This can be related to Tony Porter's video about the "man box" and how a "man" isn't to display any type of emotion, with the exception of anger. It's instilled from a very young age. Here we see the little boy with a fruitful smile and what may look as a desire to be active and happy, yet the girl looks passive and a bit shy.





GAP Kids

This is a clothing advertisement and again we see how the girl and the boy is socialized, the boy being active with a skateboard and the girl passive, inactive, involved in photograpy.

















A search on bing.com for "girl and boy advertisement" turned up results that backs Jean Kilbourne's "Killing Us Softly" film about how in turn porn has become global in ways that are not viewed as porn. The search pulled up suggestions such as "Girl boy make love", "Almost kiss boy and girl", "Boy kiss girl", Boy and girl holding hands", and "Boy and girl hugging."



Parents' Socialization of Children is an article by D. Terri Heath that explains different parenting techniques used throughout much of the Western world and the rest of the world as well. We come to the realization that parents are the core of a childs socialization and their job as a parent impacts the world we live in today. This article focused on parenting styles of parents in Japan, China, Israel, and the United States. The different techniques were Authoritative parents who are the ideal parents whose children are happy, cheerful, cooperative with adults, self-reliant, self controlled, and friendly with peers (1). Permissive parents of which allow autonomy, and Authoritarian which impose and enforce strict rules. The way the child is brought up was different in all the studied region. In the western world the child is brought up using the authoritative technique. In China the children spent minimal amounts of time interacting with their parents because they spent most of their time at an educational institution yet Chinese parents still appeared to be powerful socialization agents for their children. (2) In Japan and Israel, what is viewed as independence in Israel is viewed as obedient in Japan. (Independence being a child waking up, showering, eating, and getting ready for school all by his or herself. All in all, the way the parents bring their child up, the amount of interaction they have predicts the way society behaves.
Indeed parents have a major impact on how their child is raised and that is addressed in the article, "The Retro Wife" by Lisa Miller. This article focused on the mother herself and her role in her childs life. Instead of being a 21st century mother, one who works, some mothers are deciding to stay home full-time. Always being there for a child and taking care of her/him along with the previous article parenting techniques can bring up a child that if a boy will not adhere to the "man box" and if a girl, will try to be active instead of passive. Since the father isn't home as much as the mother, what equality the mother believes should be instilled in her children will come to play. It is up to the parents to take a close look at what they might be doing wrong and try to correct it to prevent violence in society as it exists today.



         

Power / Pouvoir (Autorité)

                        We can all agree on the fact that Power is such a significant word with a versatile bank of meanings from the electricity from out wall outlets to the ability of human beings. How able are you to do something have have a major impact on others around you? Can power be good, bad, or both? The answer is yes—it can be both. Based on the article, "Five Faces of Oppression," we learn that power is, in term, the oppression. It touched base on slavery and how those enslaved were oppressed and were overpowered by their masters who had a broad sense of knowledge. These slaves could be categorized into those who knew they were slaves, those who didn't know they were slaves, and those who clearly thought they were not being oppressed and that their way of living was absolutely normal. Now, not only did it touch base on slavery but it also gave us a look at exploitation. The employment or profits gained by having an individual provide services and not paying fairly is exploitation. This type of situation is more common (nowadays) if that single person does not have the right documentation to work legally in a country, therefore, giving the employer the power of oppression. Not only does exploiting others oppress them, it creates a sense of fear in that person. Exploiting gives the employer the chance to destroy the person getting exploited. This article also broke down oppression into two categories--the least oppressed "haves" and the "have-not's" (2) who wind up getting exploited by the "haves."
                       Marginalization is a form of power. It is a process of (racial) exclusion and is seen in the United States with Blacks, Asians, Hispanics, and Middle Eastern. Oppression in this form can be found in the education system and jobs. Most jobs, even though some pay equally, still marginalize  it's employees by paying slightly less to those of minority groups and if not paying then restricting the height of their career ladder. We see that wealth-holders have a significant amount of power when compared to the "have-not's." This becomes serious when the powerless believe that because they're powerless, their participation wouldn't matter. The reason? They feel they would not be heard. An example in the United States would be voting. "Powerlessness is the strongest form of oppression" (3). Speaking about the slaves once more, powerlessness prevented a lot of other slaves to be freed because they were aware of their situation but they were so marginalized, so exploited, very oppressed that it became their reality.
                   In this exercise I also watched "The Milgram Experiment." This short clip explored the world of violence and how it's not something that's out there in the real world just by nature but that violence is within us. A group of people were taken in to be part of an "experiment" unaware that it was an experiment inside an experiment. The main points I gathered from the video were belief--the belief in science to be a good thing in life to bring about positive changes in the human race has significant power. The people who were chosen to participate in the fictitious experiment were told to do a certain thing the authoritative figure was the scientist pressuring the participants to resume the experiment (administering electric shock to another person upon release of wrong answers). Tied to belief is ideology. The people who were participating had power because it was up to them to continue administering the electric shock to the subject being tested, whether or not to succumb to the indirect pressure mounted by the scientist and being told that it is very important to continue and give a potentially deadly dosage of 450 volts of electric shock, or choose to halt the experiment because they know what's morally right and wrong. It all came down to violence the key source of power. Whether we're aware or not, violence is always giving us power.
                 Violence referred in the book (114) by an image of the Egyptian police, using violence to disperse pro-democracy revolting people. I believe the significance of attaining power is violent. Many people fall into different categories and with it, their corresponding power, for example--a referee uses his authority to justify what is fair and what isn't during a game. Power can have positive and negative effects in the economy, with the government, and culture. The economic condition of one can impact others. I believe a terminology that can combine "The Milgram Experiment" with the reading, "Five Faces of Oppression" is Ideology because it becomes of second nature when an idea becomes reality, whether its factious or fictitious, non-violent or violent. No matter the circumstances, the outcomes, and effects, once you're told something you're most likely to believe (with lack of appropriate knowledge), that there becomes your reality, becoming powerful or powerless.
                     

Culture PhotoVoice Project

As we grow older and learn more and more about our society and life we come to the conclusion that sometimes what we know as "right" is wrong for others.My family goes Snowmobiling every winter in Canada (or upstate New York as alternatives) so we LOVE the winter season. My grandmother actually comes out with us and rides the sleds herself. Under "norms" a female, back in 1970s would have never been seen driving a snow motorcycle as my grandmother does, and even nowadays STILL we deem it not normal to see an elderly operate heavy machinery! 

During our trip to Canada I found myself in a Culture Shock. Canada is a lot like the United States but a bit different, a difference you can feel. Many restrictions that exist in the U.S. are nonexistent in Canada (almost) but one thing I found extraordinary is the language. A bilingual country yet what seemed to be monolingual in the province of Québec where they speak French.

Continuing with Culture Shock, Quebecois, along with the cuisine was something astonishing. In my family our cuisine is mainly Italian and American. One day it'll be burger night and we'd eat cheese burgers but the other nights for dinner my mother would cook an Italian meal, even though she's not Italian. My parents taught me to try everything I've never tried before so I'd eat just about anything! While in Canada I fell in love with Escargot, it's snails with mozzarella cheese, garlic, and olive oil--delicious! 

Language in Canada is such an amazing thing that affects culture. Canada is divided into provinces and every province except that of Québec speak English—Québec speaking French. I wasn't completely lost while there but everyone looked at me as if I was. With this language you can be greeted in many different ways of which in English it'd only be, "hello" and "good morning!" In my household we mainly speak English and only greet each other by a simple, "hello" or "hey!"

Here at home we're all familiar with credit and debit cards, so too are Canadians and a cultural lag I had was recognizing the use of "chip and pin." While back at home we just swipe our cards they insert them in a slot. I use this example because nowadays these cards have become such an important factor in our lives that it truly is culture!

Society. I feel that this is the same everywhere that we go. Here at home or away in Canada. Quebecois share the same society as I do home. They speak the same language and religion. Society is what keeps us together. When we're in a place where every body else around us shares the same concept as happens in our own family it keeps us afloat. My family speaks two languages: mainly English and occasionally Spanish, with French very rarely. We share the same religion and you may say, "why wouldn't you?" and the answer is because I could have chosen to go a "different" way. That's society here, anywhere.
Behaviors affect the way society is viewed. I usually tie behaviors with language, the way you carry yourself by the way you speak. Language can be classified as "slang" and "proper." Usually those who speak a language properly would behave in a different way than those who do not. My parents speak our language properly, though my mother may have an accent she does not use slang terms, therefore whenever I hear some one speaking with those terms I view them not as professional as they could be. Slang-speakers would clothe differently too. Of course, not only language can be a determining factor of behaviors. Each family has morals. In my family my grandfather taught me and my siblings to always say please and thank you when asking for something--even if it's asking you to call me.

Symbols are everywhere and even what isn't a symbol for you may be a symbol for someone else. I'm very patriotic, so patriotic that I actually have a HUGE flag hanging on my wall displaying the love that I have for my country. Flags are very big symbols that can also affect people's behaviors. Cellphones I view as a symbol of freedom--we can explore the Internet and research things we had no clues about.

Beliefs could also be tied with symbols and religion or morals and norms. A belief I can say we all share is the right to liberty and pursuit of happiness. Our society has grown to have the belief that we are all created equal--it's on the constitution and it's what democracy is based upon.

Culture War. In our cultures we all have something that has a major disagreement with the way you do things. My family is Catholic and a culture war that we have at hand is same sex marriage and abortion. Catholics are open to everything--at least I am. You have the right to love who you love. My priest reminds us that God is LOVE. This is also a national matter (gov't), providing equality to all.

Knowledge is key. In my household we know that knowledge gets us far. While many on a computer may be on facebook, I like to look up things, finding terminologies I'm unaware of--looking it up, gaining insights. Knowledge affects our culture because it affects our beliefs, behaviors, society, and norms. As knowledge is gained, change is proclaimed. For example, the news constantly gives us knowledge of what's going on out in the world.


                                                                  - - - End / Fin - - -

"Teenage Wasteland"

Eventually, one day, we'll want the best for our children but sometimes the best isn't what'll be best for them. I hope I didn't lose you there! In the article, "Teenage Wasteland," by Donna Gaines we see that teenage suicide rates have dramatically increased in the past forty years. We become aware that national issues such at teenage suicide, gun control, mass murder, do not become a major problem until it happens to a group of people at a given time. The article explores the deaths of four teenagers from Bergenfield, NJ who all four have committed suicide and the plausible explanations, or driving factors, leading to their suicides. Here in the United States, and I'm many other countries as well, we've set normalities that shape who we are and who we become. During your high school years you might probably recall those groups of people who were more "popular" than others, you might've even been part of that group that nobody knew about unwillingly! Every school has that. During the 1970s we learned that teenagers in suburban American often found nothing to their liking to do. Schools were filled with jocks and cheerleaders, and oftentimes familiar relationships were faulty.
A way to escape involved drug use. Upon the death of these four teenagers in NJ, the newspaper referred to them as "burnouts," "druggies," "dropouts," and the whole town referred to them that way as well without knowing their situation. The article lets us know that parents have high expectations for their children, limiting them to what the parents feel is appropriate. In a teenage gathering a parent might thing that they're getting stoned when in fact they can be talking. About their futures, careers, plans in life. A major problem in this town of NJ was that teenagers barely had things to do and a way to waste time was by doing these wrongdoings. I immensely agree that if there's nothing actively thrilling to do, you, I, everyone will find something to do—right or wrong. It's a problem with society and the status quo. The way we want to be seen, thought of comes down to the way our children carry themselves. A lot of parents want to be viewed as a prestigious mother or father because their child is in a private school bringing home nothing but A's from school without asking the real question—"son/daughter, is this what you really want? Are you happy?" Ms. Gaines also did a research from an ethnologist point of view by going out and experiencing what these teenagers do. Most of them have issues at home, some may not have a person they can trust, others may be in "war" with their parents because their parents think that they're rebelling thus a way of escaping is by cutting themselves, getting drunk, abusing drugs, and ultimately committing suicide.
A major point referenced in this article was the thought of many that the United States is being divided into a two-class nation where there'd only be the rich class and the poor class—rich class having a broad knowledgeable perspective and the poor not having sufficient skill sets. Those teenagers who do not go to college will be stuck in what she referenced, "shit jobs" where they'd most likely will get paid minimum wage, often complain or whine about work and their managers, and try to waste time by doing other things because they're bored. The reason for this? They lose motivation while in high school, they (and both you and I have noticed it too) realize that they barely get the preparations needed to work in modernized jobs, many jobs require a skill set that many do not have, some even require sufficient proficiency where you'd need to have worked in such positions for an X amount of years before being considered.
The problem? Much of the problem can be pegged to the parents. Parents shape society and sometimes they are oblivious to that fact because they're too busy trying to perfect other people's views of their social standing, and their weapon? Their children. I do still believe that teenage suicide rates are still rising and it could all be taken care of if their parents let their children break that status quo. The article says, "teenage suicide until kids' bad lives go away." I agree with that statement because most of suburban America does not have activities for teenagers to do that will influence them in the long run. A lot of the times towns look down, they frown upon, on these so called "dropouts," "druggies," "burnouts," and they'd wind up not having a place to go and this has to do with the fact that what's right and what's wrong, what's normal and what is not normal has been embedded into our society that what these kids do seems abnormal. Until we change that we'll continue to have a Teenage Wasteland.

Now My Feet Won't Touch the Ground. / Maintenant, mes pieds ne touchent pas le sol.

You barely think about this but, when was the last time you stopped to think? Stopped to marvel at the beauties of outside—the sky, trees, nature. Society has deemed it to be normal, the everyday routine we have like robots most of the time. When was the last time you cried? Tears of joy, or malevolence? I do believe that sometimes crying releases some tension, even you do it for no apparent reason but many think it isn't normal. At times I teleport myself out of this planet, our brain needs the rest, for a brief two minutes or minute and a half and just think and reason about life, plants, the way things are done and are meant to be. We need rest sometimes otherwise we'll wind up lost. What's your opinion?

"The Promises and Pitfalls of Going into the Field"

               We all remember science labs, you know, those labs we used to do in middle school? One of the words I remember learning was hypothesis and learning that in science there has to be some sort of validity in my evidence. In sociology the same is true and the article I read, "The Promises and Pitfalls of Going into the Field" describes just that. Ethnology is the study of characteristics of various people and the differences and relationships between them. In this field the article emphasizes that the information you get is obtained through years of work with a minimum of two years of research depending on the topic of study. On example the article gave of an ethnography report was one done by Barbara Ehrenreich, PhD. She spent a year working low wage paying jobs all around the country (Maine, Florida, and Minnesota). In he research she reveals how "physically demanding and personally demeaning" those jobs are and ultimately how the employees are "stuck", "trapped in them." Ethnography may be compared to journalism but it differs because ethnography requires systematic long-term gathering of specified data in the field of research and involves close study in human behavior. In order to come up with a factious ethnological report there are certain steps to take. The article describes the three crucial stages in an ethnography: data gathering, data analysis, and data presentation. You cannot study a field in which you're familiar with because you might get attached—researchers being biased by their own opinions or history. Under data analysis, researchers start right away framing and refining their findings. The article states that they usually remain in the area of study. Their analysis are not based on "word of mouth" or statements said by the people being studied but by hard facts from the data gathering process stated earlier.
                In reading chapter two in my text book I realized that is a very important factor of sociology. A powerful example the this chapter of the book uses is a Santa Claus example. Children believe the main influential source in their lives—their parents. We don't quickly realize this but the parent creates this fictitious character that rewards their children for the good deeds done throughout the year. We display this Santa character on billboards, in stores, on the television, and in our movie theaters. The children each believe because their peers do so as well, then once they become a certain age, the truth comes out. Hmm, that's a very good example that wouldn't have been possible without ethnologists. This chapter focuses on doing research and finding hard based facts unlike those we gave our children about Santa. A helpful chart given (page 37) is the Elements of Social Science Research. This chart relates a lot with the article I read because just like in ethnological research we are "Identifying and understanding patterns in social life," we're gathering "empirical evidence," using "transparent methods"—analysis, and viewing "knowledge as provisional"—if new evidence is discovered. An overall learning curve is being presented by the field of ethnologist in the sociologic science spectrum.

Coldplay - Lovers In Japan

Sans Danger? / Safe?

                Are you at risk? Are we at risk? What is "being at risk?" Could I be injured, murdered, or hurt in the area where I live? Many people say that living in an urbanized area puts you at a greater risk of being murdered or injured because the concentration of people is so high, could this be a stereotype? What about those who live in a suburban to semi rural area? I would think that due to the high solidarity in suburbanized areas theives, murderers, rapists, gunmens, and "wierdos" have a greater chance to pursue what ever they want because of the following factors:

• Low police patrol
• High income family households
• Unlocked doors (whenever I sleep over my grandmum's house we'd sleep with the front door unlocked)
• Lack of streelights and illuminated sidewalks

               Meanwhile in an urbanized area such as the one I'm in, New York City, even though we have a greater population than those smaller municipalities surrounding this city and semi rural towns miles away from the city, we have more police officer patrolling our streets. People are aware that living in an urban area poses a greater risk of danger, therefore the investment to be kept safe is there. Since in New York City we've built on every square centimeter of land our neighbors are a lot more closer than they'd be in suburban areas we lock our doors.

               Could a main factor be that before suburbanizing, back when the industrial revolution occured and everyone lived in cities, the dagerous risks were high in urban areas and by suburbanizing, all the criminals (had no automobiles) couldn't go to the suburbs plus their pleasures were fulfilled in cities and as people started earning a higher income they started moving out to what seemed safer-than-the-city suburbs they grew confident of the safe guard--distance. Are you at higher risk in New York City, Los Angeles, Houston, Seattle, London, Paris, Moscow, Roma, and Madrid than you'd be in Charlestown, West Virginia or any other semi rural area? Post your opinions!!!

Blind? / Aveugle?

Do we rely solely on our apparatus' so much that we fail to 'see?' Have you lived in an urban area for so long that you barely think of nature? Have you given that poor fly a chance or maybe even not have panicked near a wasp or a bee? Living in a country where all the resources you would need to go back packing, RV-ing, or hiking is something to not take for granted. With the modernization of society we have made it sort of a priority to have our "smartphones" handy at all times and during challenging situation, we reason with the device, whether it be on Facebook or listening to music. We ten to do it often—so often it's like second nature to us because we do it without thought. It's time! And there still is time! Time to put down our gadgets. Time to get out of the urban area for a weekend and enjoy all the beauties and wonders of our planet. Almost three hundred years ago, people couldn't enjoy what we could, so get out there!

Qui Suis-Je? / Who Am I?

               Who Am I? I am what society calls a "person" but does that really define me? What makes up the person I am is my sanity, my beliefs, my hobbies, my sports, my bed, my family, and looking at tomorrow with wide open eyes. I'm a nineteen year old person who thinks he has ten more years of life left because I rush into things too rapidly. The biggest influences in my life by far are my parents and grandparents. My grandfather could take the first place trophie if there were to be one.
               I'm a fourth generation American (paternal side, first generation maternally). My father is of American-Italian decent and my mother is from Spain. I do have two last names and to make things easier I use the first one. I do not, unfortunately, speak very much Italian and I always ask my grandmother why she never embraced the language, it's so beautiful! Thus the only Italian-speeking family member I have is my great aunt. I do speak Spanish and very little French (mom speaks both). My interest for accounting came from my mother because she herself is one. I have just one sister and I remember playing "store" with her and swiping her library card as if it were a credit card. I guess it runs in the family. I have a passion for music and wanted to have a band while in highschool. I play the piano and listen to Coldplay on stressful days (everyday). During my second year in highschool I joined the Air Force JROTC and through that program I matured very quickly. I graduated a Cadet Second Leiutenant. So you're probably wondering why I had stated that it feels as if I only have ten years of life left and the answer to that is, because of that Air Force program (and my grandfather) I've started doing things teenagers my ages wouldn't do until another 5 more years. I even started saving for my retirement (401k) last year at 18 years old! I play hockey and ice skate during whatever free time I have. 
                My goals in life is to have a career in accounting and political science and to be able to have more than sufficient stability to support my needs and one day my very own family. There are things we go through that shape our personality every day and I do believe it's affected my own biography. The everyday world is changing more rapidly each and every day with rights being granted to certain groups of people (and many other things occurring around us, not just that). To keep up-to-date in this modern society we live in we must adapt to changes, and I'm not too fond of that, and a major historical factor that has change my sociological perspective has been Equality for those individuals who want what they want and break the "status-quo." This has influenced my "biography" because I've become very acceptant of new norms—it's our life! And with that being said I step out of my own view and look at things with the sociological imagination and come to realize that we're "hard-wired" to look at the normalities of today and say, "this is how it should be!" Without noticing that change is inevitable for the better.