Quick update first - I decided to make a "bag" for the homeless person I saw out on the exit in Shelburn. I put in blankets, food, water, a novel, shoes, socks, shirts, etc... and threw it the back of my car and made my way down to the ramp. Of course he wasn't there when I arrived. So I decided that from here on out, I will always carry something like that with me in case the need arises. I learned that the salvation army only serves one meal a day, so that could be why some homeless people are out begging on the streets. We should always be willing to give what we can!
A few weeks ago, I expereinced a form of discrimination against my religion. Some acquaintances of mine were up in the area because one of their grandmothers passed away. My boyfriend and I offered our space for them to stay. I have had issues with this couple before making fun of my religion, and I basically got the feeling that they believed any one that was a Christian was ignorant to believe any thing that religion was affiliated with. I really didn't expect under the circumstances that they would do this again, yet while riding in the car with them from helping set up the dinner before the grandmothers wake, they both began talking about how the blood of Christ was poison, and how reading versus out of the Bible was brainwashing. I didn't say any thing because this person's grandmother had just passed away, and I believe it would have been extremely rude to do so. I wanted to prove to myself that I could be the better person and just not say something for once. So I pretended I didn't hear. Unfortunately, I felt horrible afterward. They really make me question my own religion at times. I am not an avid church goer, but I do belive in God, and Jesus, and the story the Bible tells us. This doesn't mean I hate people that don't believe in that. What is odd, is that they are overall pretty accpeting of other people, they do not discriminate against race, gender, sexual orientation, or religions other then Chrisianity it seems. Any thing that is against societal "norms" is okay to them, but for some reason things that are supposed to be "norms" are considered extremely offensive I guess. They have to realize it is a two way street, and that every religion, social class, etc... need to be accepted, not just ones that have been oppressed in the past. It is called respect, and common decency. How long will people to continually hurt each other? It literally tears me up inside when I hear things of this nature come out of peoples mouths. They spread so much hate, and inequality. Yes, people are allowed to have opinions, but do not say things just to hurt someone.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Reading Reflection #8
"...the students quickly came to see their working-class backgrounds as a burden"(p 289). My first reaction after reading about the study of the young adults that attended East Coast law school, who were economically challenged, was one of anger. How could ones own class become a burden if you have risen above the odds and are currently attending college, which is something difficult for minority and lower class individuals to accomplish, especially a prestigious law school like this one is. The students apparently tried to mimic the actions, dress, and speech of their upper class peers, totally taking away any diversity that could have been. When people try to fit in like that they end up losing themselves and who they really are. Is society making them this way, by telling them it is not okay to be poor? That if you are associating with people that are economically better off then you that you must try to act like them, or pretend to be like them? Although this isn't the only case, where people felt like they couldn't be themselves. Many homosexual men and women are afraid to "come out of the closet" because they are worried they could lose their jobs, friends, and even possibly their family. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 states that a person can't be denied a job or fired from their existing one because of gender, race, religion, or ethnicity. No where does it state that you cannot get fired because of your sexual orientation. Although that isn't to say that some states do not ban this. Many counties and municipalities, 14 states, and the District of Columbia ban workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation. Yet there are still 36 states that say it's okay to fire someone if they are a homosexual. Can you imagine the fear that some people must go through. They have to hide who they truly are, and worry that if any one finds out they could lose their job. A persons job is a major part of their life. They spend at least forty hours a week at it. It isn't something that should be taken away because of their sexual orientation. It's even harder for men that do not take on what is considered the typical male job. Male teachers, nurses, dental hygienists, etc... are sometimes criticized for the "womanly" job they take, and are considered gay from the start. What is interesting is that during the early nineteenth century most of the teachers in America were male. It was a time in history where a person that was born male male teachers even then. either taught or went to war. This is where the phrase, "Those who can't, teach" originated from. Many people looked down on male teachers even then. How ignorant is that? Is the job considered so low that only women can possibly do it? What a double standard! Now think about the minorities that are discriminated against in the workplace. They can't hide their differences from the world like the gay community are sometimes able to. They where their differences on their skin. It isn't a secret that could leak out if you tell the wrong person. African Americans are seen for their color, and then some corporations take a direct or indirect racist attitude toward them. For instance, the Miami restaurant that added 15% to an African Americans bill because they believed that "blacks don't tip well". How horrible is that! Also the text talks about the group of black customers that rose above being discriminated against and sued the Denny's restaurant chain because they would have to pay a coverage charge before each meal, they were refused entrance at times, and they were subjected to threats or derogatory remarks. All these people wanted to do was go out to eat, when did that become a crime in America?
The text explained affirmative action as a program that seeks out or provides equal opportunities to members of ethnoracial minority groups and women for educational or occupational positions in which they had previously been underrepresented. It really made me open my eyes. After reading about how far behind white American has put minority groups, the least we can do is to help them rise to our level in society. The six-year graduation rate for Native Americans, Latinos/as, and African Americans is well below 505 compared to 605 for white students. Institutionally, we really need to help minority groups out. It is something that shouldn't even be argued about. Look how long white Americans have been oppressing them? Ever sense Anglo Saxons landed in America and called it their home, pushing Indians further and further off their land. Don't you think the minority groups deserve this help?
I really thought this chapter was overall a very interesting read. Although the author did challenge a belief of mine, with supposed statistics as well. The author states how a person in 2003 would have had to make $15.21 an hour to afford rental housing, and how nowhere in the United States today is there a person with a full-time minimum wage job could afford rental housing. If I am understanding it correctly, this statement is wrong. I currently live with a friend of mine, and I only work one to twice a week making, 3 and half hours at a time, making ten dollars an hour. He makes twelve dollars an hour at a full-time position, and we live quite comfortably. We budget our money extremely well, and find ourselves able to even have a social life outside of rent at $1200(which includes electricity, heat, water, sewer, garbage removal, recycling, snow removal, and lawn care) cell phone bills, cable, credit cards, car loans, insurance, food, gas, and other miscellaneous items. Every month we make a chart on Excel to budget our exact amount what it has to go toward. It seems to work out fine. So I really believe the author was incorrect in stating what he did. It is possible that I am not understanding him right, and he means like a family of four, if any one understand this better then I do, don't hesitate to correct me.
The text explained affirmative action as a program that seeks out or provides equal opportunities to members of ethnoracial minority groups and women for educational or occupational positions in which they had previously been underrepresented. It really made me open my eyes. After reading about how far behind white American has put minority groups, the least we can do is to help them rise to our level in society. The six-year graduation rate for Native Americans, Latinos/as, and African Americans is well below 505 compared to 605 for white students. Institutionally, we really need to help minority groups out. It is something that shouldn't even be argued about. Look how long white Americans have been oppressing them? Ever sense Anglo Saxons landed in America and called it their home, pushing Indians further and further off their land. Don't you think the minority groups deserve this help?
I really thought this chapter was overall a very interesting read. Although the author did challenge a belief of mine, with supposed statistics as well. The author states how a person in 2003 would have had to make $15.21 an hour to afford rental housing, and how nowhere in the United States today is there a person with a full-time minimum wage job could afford rental housing. If I am understanding it correctly, this statement is wrong. I currently live with a friend of mine, and I only work one to twice a week making, 3 and half hours at a time, making ten dollars an hour. He makes twelve dollars an hour at a full-time position, and we live quite comfortably. We budget our money extremely well, and find ourselves able to even have a social life outside of rent at $1200(which includes electricity, heat, water, sewer, garbage removal, recycling, snow removal, and lawn care) cell phone bills, cable, credit cards, car loans, insurance, food, gas, and other miscellaneous items. Every month we make a chart on Excel to budget our exact amount what it has to go toward. It seems to work out fine. So I really believe the author was incorrect in stating what he did. It is possible that I am not understanding him right, and he means like a family of four, if any one understand this better then I do, don't hesitate to correct me.
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Reading Reflection #7
"When children pledge their allegiance to the American flag each morning in school, they conclude with the phrase, "... and justice for all." " (p 265) The pledge of allegiance originated during the late nineteenth century, and weaved its way through our educational and political systems. Around this time, the Anglo Saxon's in the U.S. were attempting to assimilate the enormous amounts of immigrants coming into the U.S. in the White man's culture. The pledge of allegiance was made to further along this assimilation. Every child, including the immigrants would say this every day in school to basically ingrain into them what being American meant. After I first learned this, I developed a totally new perspective around it. It clearly was a time when "justice for all" meant justice for the White, middle class men. Maybe that is why it still doesn't ring completely true in the twenty first century as well.
After finishing this chapter, I was really shocked. Mostly by the statistics of all the injustices in the world today. Statistics that showed racism, class ism, sexism, and discrimination against gender being prevalent today. It made me open my eyes. I never realized that the percentage of African Americans that make up the population in the U.S. is not equivalent to how many are in jail compared to the numbers of White Americans. It really is sad. The most upsetting part was how Black youth are subjected to longer, and more severe sentences for committing the same crime then the White youth in this country. In no way is that considered justice.
I changed my attitudes on corporate crime versus street crime after I read this chapter. I never realized how many upper White American males get short sentences for stealing billions of dollars from their company and therefore effecting every one in the community by doing so, while both White, and Black lower class individuals get longer sentences for stealing or attempting to steal billions of dollars in a bank robbery. It seems incredibly unjust to me. I understand if that person who committed the bank robbery got a longer sentence if they murdered someone , but initially they are committing a crime very similar to that of the upper white class individual who stole billions from their company.
I felt as though the authors own biases should have been put into this chapter to make it more personal. He explained how every one has their biases, and it is good to know which ones those are, but he never explained what his were. I just felt like if he included that information it wouldn't make it seem as taboo, because in order to fix something we really need to lay all out and be honest about how we feel. That is the only way we can really fix things in order to make America a place where every one gets the justice they deserve.
After finishing this chapter, I was really shocked. Mostly by the statistics of all the injustices in the world today. Statistics that showed racism, class ism, sexism, and discrimination against gender being prevalent today. It made me open my eyes. I never realized that the percentage of African Americans that make up the population in the U.S. is not equivalent to how many are in jail compared to the numbers of White Americans. It really is sad. The most upsetting part was how Black youth are subjected to longer, and more severe sentences for committing the same crime then the White youth in this country. In no way is that considered justice.
I changed my attitudes on corporate crime versus street crime after I read this chapter. I never realized how many upper White American males get short sentences for stealing billions of dollars from their company and therefore effecting every one in the community by doing so, while both White, and Black lower class individuals get longer sentences for stealing or attempting to steal billions of dollars in a bank robbery. It seems incredibly unjust to me. I understand if that person who committed the bank robbery got a longer sentence if they murdered someone , but initially they are committing a crime very similar to that of the upper white class individual who stole billions from their company.
I felt as though the authors own biases should have been put into this chapter to make it more personal. He explained how every one has their biases, and it is good to know which ones those are, but he never explained what his were. I just felt like if he included that information it wouldn't make it seem as taboo, because in order to fix something we really need to lay all out and be honest about how we feel. That is the only way we can really fix things in order to make America a place where every one gets the justice they deserve.
Friday, October 12, 2007
Observation #3 "You just never know"
When I was riding with my friend in my car, I noticed a man on an off ramp with a sign asking for food. I I have noticed this man about three times before as well. I started talking to my friend and telling him that we should give this men some food and blankets. He looked at me as though I was crazy. He said I didn't know what that man would do if I stopped the car. He could have a gun, he could be a bad person. I didn't see the harm in just stopping to give food, but I understood his point. You just never know sometimes. I didn't know this person's history. Did he live at a shelter? Was there no food left and that is why he was begging for it? What was the reason he was out there? Was he a veteran? Did he have a mental illness? What was it? Hadn't a social worker or police officer gone by him and asked him if he needed them to bring him to a shelter or somewhere to get food? I never know what to do in those situations? How can I help and ensure my own safety? Who can I trust and who can't I? Who can I call to help this person? I really want to look into this more. There has to be something that I can do to, and I am going to find out just what that is.
Reading Reflection #6
"According to the World Health Organization (1995), poverty is the single greatest cause of ill health in the world today: " (p 205) Although I realized that poverty had an effect on a person's well being, I never realized it was the leading cause of health problems. My first reaction to this was one of guilt. After realizing that poverty, and food shortages are all caused by people, and not natural phenomenas, made me feel as though there is more that I can do to make this world a better place. It made me extremely disgusted with with wealthy countries, when I found out that they could easily afford to provide sufficient supplies to poor countries to keep them in good health. In 2005, the United Nations declared that only taking 1% of the total income of wealthy countries would end world hunger. The United States currently only provides 1/5 of that 1% . It seems that helping the ill and poverty stricken just isn't any one's top priority. Why?
I am still struggling with why America wouldn't give the full 1% when other countries are donating even more then they are. Is it that we can't afford it? the United Nations declared that it was "utterly affordable". So what is the real answer? After reading this chapter thoroughly, I still haven't found it. Does any one else have any ideas as to why? Does it have to do with the war that has been going on in Iraq? Is there ever a good excuse to let numbers of people die each year for reasons that can be controlled?
When I was reading about the discrimination of health care based on an individuals race, class, and sexuality, I became infuriated. I couldn't believe the terms that were used, such as "green screen", meaning that a person's financial situations was more important then their clinical information when it came to being wait listed for an organ transplant. WOW! How is that not illegal? It certainly reinforces the belief that "money makes the world go round". Apparently health care clinics believe that person's of a certain race are destined to have the same financial background. Look at all the Chinese people that were at the hospital for probably days when the American was brought to the front of the line, because they thought there was a better chance that he would be able to pay them because of his race/ethnicity. My attitudes have totally changed toward the health care system after reading this. It gives me further belief that I shouldn't be trusting of health insurance companies, or even doctors, or hospitals. It is sad when the people that are supposed to be there to help you, are the ones that you need to be wary of. Whoever though your class position, race, etc... would determine your health care needs?
There were a few different topics in the reading that I did find interesting. One was a term they used known as the sick role. It basically describes the fact that each society has a certain set of expectations that people need to meet when they are sick. If a person does not behave this way, then they are not considered sick, or considered that they want to get better. It talked about how women in the 19th century, if wealthy, were considered to be very delicate beings that always needed bed rest. The lower class women were considered tougher, and were thought to have "thicker skin". Still to this day, women are more susceptible then men are to be labeled sick. Pregnancy, childbirth, menopause, and menstruation have been medicalized or pathologized. This means that normal biological events in women's lives were considered to be problematic and in need of medical attention. The medical world has even coined the term Premenstrual Syndrome to explain why women get moody, or depressed right before or during their period. The social world now uses this as an excuse to blame sudden mood swings on menstruation. I always here women and men use that excuse to explain their partners, or their own behavior. There are even shirts that have the saying, "Don't mess with me, I have PMS". This just further perpetuates the cycle that women are allowed to act a certain way just because of a normal biological function.
Overall this reading was really informative. It seemed the author really tried to make an emotional connection with his readers. He really wanted them to realize how it is for people of a certain race, class or sexuality. He definitely succeeded in doing so from my point of view.
I am still struggling with why America wouldn't give the full 1% when other countries are donating even more then they are. Is it that we can't afford it? the United Nations declared that it was "utterly affordable". So what is the real answer? After reading this chapter thoroughly, I still haven't found it. Does any one else have any ideas as to why? Does it have to do with the war that has been going on in Iraq? Is there ever a good excuse to let numbers of people die each year for reasons that can be controlled?
When I was reading about the discrimination of health care based on an individuals race, class, and sexuality, I became infuriated. I couldn't believe the terms that were used, such as "green screen", meaning that a person's financial situations was more important then their clinical information when it came to being wait listed for an organ transplant. WOW! How is that not illegal? It certainly reinforces the belief that "money makes the world go round". Apparently health care clinics believe that person's of a certain race are destined to have the same financial background. Look at all the Chinese people that were at the hospital for probably days when the American was brought to the front of the line, because they thought there was a better chance that he would be able to pay them because of his race/ethnicity. My attitudes have totally changed toward the health care system after reading this. It gives me further belief that I shouldn't be trusting of health insurance companies, or even doctors, or hospitals. It is sad when the people that are supposed to be there to help you, are the ones that you need to be wary of. Whoever though your class position, race, etc... would determine your health care needs?
There were a few different topics in the reading that I did find interesting. One was a term they used known as the sick role. It basically describes the fact that each society has a certain set of expectations that people need to meet when they are sick. If a person does not behave this way, then they are not considered sick, or considered that they want to get better. It talked about how women in the 19th century, if wealthy, were considered to be very delicate beings that always needed bed rest. The lower class women were considered tougher, and were thought to have "thicker skin". Still to this day, women are more susceptible then men are to be labeled sick. Pregnancy, childbirth, menopause, and menstruation have been medicalized or pathologized. This means that normal biological events in women's lives were considered to be problematic and in need of medical attention. The medical world has even coined the term Premenstrual Syndrome to explain why women get moody, or depressed right before or during their period. The social world now uses this as an excuse to blame sudden mood swings on menstruation. I always here women and men use that excuse to explain their partners, or their own behavior. There are even shirts that have the saying, "Don't mess with me, I have PMS". This just further perpetuates the cycle that women are allowed to act a certain way just because of a normal biological function.
Overall this reading was really informative. It seemed the author really tried to make an emotional connection with his readers. He really wanted them to realize how it is for people of a certain race, class or sexuality. He definitely succeeded in doing so from my point of view.
Friday, October 5, 2007
Reading Reflection #5
"Hey-wait-a-minute! ... You're not a Jew, are you?!" (pg 149) Wow, the author totally let us see a different side of him in this chapter, Expressing Inequalities. Apparently this topic really hit home for him. Having someone question your religion at such a young age can be life changing, especially when that person also threatens your safety. I really was glad to see the author giving us a little bit of his life stories, it made the read more enjoyable, and I was able to see things from his point of view as well as my own.
My first reaction to his story was one of rage. I really wish I could have been there to stop that other child from hitting him. I couldn't believe that something like that occurred without any thing being done about it. Of course that was a different generation. But was it? This generation also experiences hate crimes, such as the Jena (6) incident where nooses were found hanging from a tree in a prominently black and white high school. Those nooses were not considered hate crimes, but a school prank. We haven't come as far as we think we have.
The author really painted a clear picture for me by giving the definition to stereotypes. I had an "Alright!" moment when I read that people use stereotypes in order to see our social environment as a more understandable and manageable place. We are always defining classes and other groups, which in response creates a fulfilling prophecy of some kind. This needs to stop! It is a never ending cycle that continues to loop around, and will eventually strangle us. It really isn't necessary to classify people into groups, whether they are being seen in a good light or not,which is called the "model minority". For example, the stereotype that all Asians are smart. A compliment? Possibly, but still a stereotype none the less. It is when these stereotypes become unfavorable judgements on our behalf, they are known as prejudices.
After I read the piece on racial transparency, I have totally changed my beliefs. I didn't honestly think that whites never experienced racial tensions, but institutionally I guess they really haven't. I hate the fact that being white means I don't have to worry about certain things that others do have to worry about. Now I will look for opportunities where I can change this.
Overall this chapter was very insightful, and the author's point of view on the subject was very refreshing. Hopefully he continues to do this in future chapters.
My first reaction to his story was one of rage. I really wish I could have been there to stop that other child from hitting him. I couldn't believe that something like that occurred without any thing being done about it. Of course that was a different generation. But was it? This generation also experiences hate crimes, such as the Jena (6) incident where nooses were found hanging from a tree in a prominently black and white high school. Those nooses were not considered hate crimes, but a school prank. We haven't come as far as we think we have.
The author really painted a clear picture for me by giving the definition to stereotypes. I had an "Alright!" moment when I read that people use stereotypes in order to see our social environment as a more understandable and manageable place. We are always defining classes and other groups, which in response creates a fulfilling prophecy of some kind. This needs to stop! It is a never ending cycle that continues to loop around, and will eventually strangle us. It really isn't necessary to classify people into groups, whether they are being seen in a good light or not,which is called the "model minority". For example, the stereotype that all Asians are smart. A compliment? Possibly, but still a stereotype none the less. It is when these stereotypes become unfavorable judgements on our behalf, they are known as prejudices.
After I read the piece on racial transparency, I have totally changed my beliefs. I didn't honestly think that whites never experienced racial tensions, but institutionally I guess they really haven't. I hate the fact that being white means I don't have to worry about certain things that others do have to worry about. Now I will look for opportunities where I can change this.
Overall this chapter was very insightful, and the author's point of view on the subject was very refreshing. Hopefully he continues to do this in future chapters.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)