The Chronicle

                                                                 Poverty in the World


Cool site on education/ class etc.. in the U.S.

This week we talked about social class and structure, and this article talks about it as well. This article discusses the Marxist viewpoint of social class. Marx believed that there were only two classes of people, the people who produced the means of production, and those who owned it. This is still somewhat true today, but we have more classes in between. If one person owns GM, and another person is working for GM, the owner is no question held in a higher manner. The owner is also making much more than the worker.  Marx was not totally off base, but his idea of a socialistic society just cannot take place today. It is human nature to want more, and after ass isn’t that what we are told from when we are born? Bigger is better, and more is better as well. Those who make $50,000 what to make $100,000 and those who make $100,000 want to make $200,000. After all, there is nothing wrong with wanting more. This way of thinking, however, does hurt our society in a harsh way. The article states “Why is it that the west has accumulated more resources than human history has ever witnessed, yet it appears powerless to overcome poverty, starvation, exploitation, and inequality?”  We have enough for everyone to live a full and good life, yet our system of giving out the resources is still flawed. As we saw in the cookie demonstration, five people got five cookies each while ten people got a crumb to share. Similarly, we have people making billions and people living on the street.  According to a report by aneki.com, the U.S. continues to get richer by the year, yet our poverty rate is increasing as well. Aren’t those two stats supposed to be inversely related? How could we be getting richer yet the poverty rate keeps increasing? The reason for this is that the rich keep getting richer, and the poor keep getting poorer.  The top one percent owns something like a quarter of the wealth in the country.

                The article also talks about Marx not being opposed to capitalism, but realizing that it would not work out well for many people involved in such a system. It states “This is not to suggest for a moment that Marx considered capitalism as simply a bad thing, like admiring Sarah Palin or blowing tobacco smoke in your children’s faces.” I liked the quote due to the obvious Palin reference, but I also like the fact that it shows us that Marx did not despise Capitalism, but knew that privately owned means of production would leave some very wealthy, and some dirt poor. The sad truth is that 100% equality can never be reached. It is an idea that has no way to succeed with our people.  Marx notes that prestige and salary are related, but as we did the activity about prestige for certain jobs, I realized that is not always the case. We usually give prestige to jobs involving a formal education with the ability to think and have the intellect few posses. We think of a prestigious job as one that requires sitting in a room and listening to a professor talking about the proper business strategy or how a prosecution works. When we were working on the “most powerful people sheet”, most of my people were not politicians, business executives, or lawyers, but actors and pro athletes. Do Will Ferrell and Derrick Rose not contain a tremendous amount of respect and prestige for their respective professions? I would rather have lunch with those two guys compared to anyone, including Obama or Bill Gates. While they do make a lot of money, they did not have very formal education, or need to think outside the box in tough situations (In fact Rose probably had a GPA close to one and didn’t even take the ACT). What I came up with is that prestige has more to do with how difficult a task is, and one’s ability to overcome it. Both actors and athletes go through intense training and work very hard physically and mentally. We tend to think of poor people as laborers, but that Idea is wrong. Just because someone is working physically for their paycheck instead of mentally, do they not deserve to get paid? Aren’t they also working?

                The article makes a good point of “The richest civilizations on earth sweated every bit as hard as their Neolithic ancestors”. Even the richest people work for their money, and we are taught to work hard in our lives. Our sole motivation for working hard is to be able to make a lot of money. Why would we work hard if we were told that everyone is going to make the same amount no matter how hard they worked? This is the problem with some other systems of economy. Students now day’s stay up for hours to study for tests, and work for a good GPA. If a 4.0 didn’t make a difference compared to a 1.0 in potential salary, then we wouldn’t do anything. I wouldn’t be working on this blog, and instead might write only a couple of sentences if I knew that my grade has no impact on my future. Humans must be motivated to work hard.

                We also talked about the caste system in India. While we do not have such restrictions placed on improving our social class, I do believe restrains exist. Consider a family making $30,000 annually compared to one making $200,000. The first family might come from a poorly educated family. They might not push their children to succeed in school. A “C” might be a good grade, where the second family might push their children to try hard, and emphasize an “A”. I know that if my parents were to congratulate me for a “B”, I might not work as hard for the “A”. Secondly, the first child also wouldn’t have money for a tutor. If he was failing a class for example, the rich family might be able to afford a tutor for class, and standardized tests, while the poor child would have to improve his grades and scores by himself. Another thing might be that the poor child might have to work after school, while the rich child might get to study for a test or work on a project. The poor child might not be able to afford to go to college, and might have to work at a low paying job to support his family, while the rich child could go to college and get a nice job. The point I am trying to make is that the family we are born into might also limit us in terms of having a better life that our parents if they are not financially stable. Even thought we have room for advancement, if one is born into a “poor” family, it is very difficult to climb out of the hole and raise your status. For this reason, I know that I am blessed to be in my situation where I don’t need to worry about money or paying for college and can focus solely on my grades.

                People with higher financial status are expected to achieve to a higher degree for this reason, and they are also not expected to steal a couple of $20 shirts if they make 450k annually. I read online that Mike Leake of the Reds baseball team was arrested for stealing $50 worth of t-shirts from a Macy’s. There was a huge uproar, and everyone was shocked. The reason they were shocked was because this pro ballplayer make a million times that amount. If someone working at McDonalds making $25,000 were to steal the shirts, then it would be no big deal but the fact that someone making half a million dollars a year were to steal the shirts is amazing. One final note on the Marx article is that it states “The moral ostriches of the world are those who deny that there can be radical change”, and “Competition would no longer take the form of some bankers complaining that their bonuses have been reduced to a miserly 5 million while others struggle to survive on less than $2 a day.” This is already taking place, and soon we will have those making $20 million, and those who are dead because they have no food to eat. “If things don’t change, there will only be one class; the upper class.

The Conquest of Cool

                                  This is how children dressed in the 1950's when going to school

Charlie Sheen Michael Jordan Hanes Commercial

The Conquest of Cool talks about men’s clothing, and how it has changed over the years. This is similar to what we discussed in class. In class, we talked about how and what affects the decisions we make. These decisions include clothing. Clothes were first invented as a means of protection of the skin from extreme weather conditions, but they soon turned into fashion statements. Similarly, shoes were invented as a weapon to wear to keep feet from getting hurt from the sharp objects on the ground. Today, we see shoes as a fashion statement. For example, I never buy New Balance shoes, and almost always buy Adidas due to their designs on the shoes. So how did we become a society wanting clothes that were the most comfortable and jackets that were the warmest to one where we cannot wear anything that doesn’t have a Lactose alligator or Prada printed on it?

            This change started to occur when clothing companies spent billions on advertising, and telling people that their clothes makes them more likeable or more attractive. In class we talked about things like peers, media, and parents influencing our decisions. All of these components contribute to our clothing. Every time I turn on the T.V., many of the advertisements are about buying certain clothes to make you look more appealing to the opposite sex. In middle school, all of the cool kids wore Abercrombie and American eagle. So of course I had to be cool as well. I soon found my closet filled with these two brands of clothing. I would only wear these brands exclusively for a period of over a year. After middle school, I became less brand conscious, and didn’t really care as much about brand name. My parents also influenced my clothing decisions. Since my father only wears regular underwear, I too only wore plain underwear. It wasn’t until the age of ten when I found out about boxers. Once I tried them, there was no turning back. The boxer’s felt a million times better than underwear. He also wore Ralph Lauren shirts. Naturally I grew accustomed to wearing them as well. People are also influenced based on price tag. Instead of looking for the sales, we often buy things because they are more expensive. I admit that I even buy certain brands because they are more expensive. I have bought Armani jeans that cost triple that of my Wranglers, but they looked exactly the same. The brand makes it more expensive. What would be so great about a Rolex if it cost fifty bucks? Its price makes it rare, and that is what makes the watch more appealing. My grandpa gave me one of his Rolex watches, as well as a Citizen. I often wear the Citizen to the movies or restaurants, but only wear the Rolex on special occasions. It’s not because I think the Rolex looks better, in fact I like the look of the Citizen much more. It is because of the price of the watch, and often times that is the sole reason we buy things. Maybe we should stop focusing on purchasing things because they are more expensive, and start looking for clothes on sale.

            This article references the change from monotonous clothes to unique clothing. It also mentions how our clothing style has moved to more comfortable clothing. It talks about how we are “permitting a freedom of movement absent in traditional suits” compared to our predecessors. In the U.S., we value comfort. We are willing to sacrifice a bit of fashion for comfortable clothing. Everyone owns jeans and t-shirts because they are comfortable. We talked about how in European countries, people would only wear t-shirts if they were exercising, and never to school. Here, many schools even have a PJ day, and half of us wear sweatshirts and sweatpants to school every day. We also talked about how America values individuality. Whereas in some countries we might be expected to be uniform, here we are allowed to wear what we like. Public schools don’t have strict dress codes and many clothing designs include flashy or sparkling colors. The article states that instead of wearing the same things, we “are expressive through our inner nature rather than molding into a uniform appearance.” Another example of how clothing is a statement is shown by the use of hats. People bought hats to protect their head from heat and rain, but today, while still used for those purposes, we purchase hats and caps based on their brand or to show which sports team we support.

                        The title of a Men’s Wear article in 1966 was “Break the Rules”. This once again shows how our culture has shifted to a more expressive mentality compared to a reserved one. We are also a society that wants to look nothing like their parents in terms of clothing. While our parents might influence our decisions as young children, as we grow older we have our own style. One of New Suit’s claims is that they are “different from the standardized styles your father once wore.” Phoenix clothes also advertise “a wow of a word that immediately takes you away from the ordinary.” Once again, standing out is viewed as a positive.

            Many people purchase clothes based on a group or click they belong to. Jocks might dress a certain way, and Goths dress differently to show that they are different. The thing about brand name clothes is that everyone and every group want them. “From the rock stars, to the students, to the hippies”, everyone cares about how they look. I liked the quote about the typical man. “The typical man wears a Bill Blass suit, plays golf at the country club, and drives a thunderbird which he thinks is a sports car.” This sounds just like the typical man. The idea is to break away from this concept of normal. Pepsi states “Youth is an attitude, not an age now days.” People often wear certain clothes to make them look younger as well.

            As I mentioned before, advertising and the media plays a crucial role in our decision of clothing. Companies aren’t crazy to pay people like Michael Jordan millions for a thirty second commercial in which he just has to wear a Hanes undershirt. These tactics work very efficiently. I was reading an interesting article yesterday about Tom Brady. Audi gave Tom an A8 for free. They obviously did this so he could be seen driving their car, and in turn want consumers to want it. He crashed this free $130, 00 car, and Audi did not get angry. In fact, they gave him a brand new one. Yes, I was shocked as well. It turns out that there was a lot of the publicity, and it helped increase sales for Audi. Someone debating between the A8 and BMW 7 series might have bought the Audi because they heard Tom Brady drives it.

            Today, we live in a world where everyone worries about what they are wearing. I cannot go into my own backyard without thinking about what I’m wearing because the neighbors might see.  The final major influential part of clothing is price. People are also influenced based on price tag. Instead of looking for the sales, we often buy things because they are more expensive. I admit that I even buy certain brands because they are more expensive. I have bought Armani jeans that cost triple that of my Wranglers, but they looked exactly the same. The brand makes it more expensive. What would be so great about a Rolex if it cost fifty bucks? Its price makes it rare, and that is what makes the watch more appealing. My grandpa gave me one of his Rolex watches, as well as a Citizen. I often wear the Citizen to the movies or restaurants, but only wear the Rolex on special occasions. It’s not because I think the Rolex looks better, in fact I like the look of the Citizen much more. It is because of the price of the watch, and often times that is the sole reason we buy things. Maybe we should stop focusing on purchasing things because they are more expensive, and start looking for the sales like common sense tells us to do.

Sex and Gender

                                     Homosexuality is a heated debate topic in this country, and will continue to be

The 3rd gender

The article From Mirror Self Recognition to the Looking- Glass Self talks a lot about how we perceive others, and what we think others think of us. Last week we talked about the actions we take in order to be a certain way, and this week we talked about a similar concept. Our discussion this week was not what we believe in how others think of us, but how society is trying to mold us into certain types of people. We all want to look masculine if we are guys or feminine if we are girls, but the ideas of masculinity, and feminism were created several thousand years ago. The Idea that men should be muscular and women should have big breasts in order to look attractive has been norms and staples for societies all over the world for centuries. Just like our surroundings telling us how to behave, the article talks about people having to justify their actions to others. The article states “When the actor sees their action as unjustified, they feel shame.” For example if someone is a homosexual, they might try to hide their sexual preference. This is because society tells us that being gay is wrong, and it is frowned upon.  This idea was first developed in religion. Most of the major religions forbid the act of homosexuality. Since most of the world follows one of the major religions, the vast majority of us don’t look favorably on gays.

            The video we watched about the 3^rd gender was very strange and a bit humorous to me. I couldn’t even begin to comprehend this mixed gender of man and women. While this person may have some good qualities of both genders, in our culture, we would find such a thing horrendous and sick. I also didn’t really know that there was a difference between Gender and Sex. I thought the two were interchangeable. As the video shows, they are clearly two different things. I found the part where the narrator stated “If we need more women in the house, then we take one of the boys and make them a woman” very funny. I can’t imagine my parents telling me something like “Okay son we need another person to take care of your brother so you are now a girl.” While I see this practice as cruel and wrong, if it works for the Samoans, then it’s fine. This topic could lead us into the discussion of how God meant for only two genders, and we are not supposed to just create a third.

            This is similar to our class discussion today where we talked about feminist and women’s rights. We also talked about what feminine characteristics and masculine characteristics are, and how we are starting to integrate both aspects into both genders. While I think some of them are fine, like men crying some times and women participating in sports, I do think there needs to be a separation between the two. If we allow men to take on women’s characteristics, and vice versa we may end up only having one gender. I’m probably exaggerating, and it could actually be a good thing to mix into the other gender’s characteristics. There was an article on Yahoo today about a high school girl in Florida who was one of the top 100 players in the country. Not only is this female playing a male dominated sport, but she is also excelling at it, and was able to throw an 87mph fastball! The best part was that she was willing to cross the boundaries, and venture into something that she might be thought of as less attractive, or more masculine.

            We also did a worksheet this week focusing on the differences between males and females, and how each one comes about. I never really thought of gender as a mindset, but I can see how it kind of is. Girls, for example are taught at a very young age to like Barbie dolls, makeup, and the color pink. Boys are into sports, cars, and electronics. This was apparent in the toysrus activity. I remember when I was ten, my mother made me take piano lessons. I hated the idea and insisted on guitar. I was so resistant because I saw the piano as a feminine instrument, and the guitar was as male an instrument as it got. The article about the looking glass self also talks about how we give reasons to act a certain way. Our society may do things according to the status quo just because they do not want to be seen as different. Erving Goffman talks about how “Self consciousness is involved in using a disclaimer as a shield.” “I often say things like I’m not sure” or “I think”. Similarly when it comes to the status quo, we cannot break it or our shield will break apart and we will take on criticism. The article states that “The large scale systems of justification we call culture emerges with successive generations.” Similarly, our culture cannot be changed, and nor can the way we see gender and Sex. I do believe however that some of our customs are changing. Men are no longer the dominant member of many households. In my house for example, my mother has complete authority, and whatever she says my father must agree with. If we take a vote, I, my brother, and father each have one vote, and my mother has four votes.

           

The article From Mirror Self Recognition to the Looking- Glass Self talks a lot about how we perceive others, and what we think others think of us. Last week we talked about the actions we take in order to be a certain way, and this week we talked about a similar concept. Our discussion this week was not what we believe in how others think of us, but how society is trying to mold us into certain types of people. We all want to look masculine if we are guys or feminine if we are girls, but the ideas of masculinity, and feminism were created several thousand years ago. The Idea that men should be muscular and women should have big breasts in order to look attractive has been norms and staples for societies all over the world for centuries. Just like our surroundings telling us how to behave, the article talks about people having to justify their actions to others. The article states “When the actor sees their action as unjustified, they feel shame.” For example if someone is a homosexual, they might try to hide their sexual preference. This is because society tells us that being gay is wrong, and it is frowned upon.  This idea was first developed in religion. Most of the major religions forbid the act of homosexuality. Since most of the world follows one of the major religions, the vast majority of us don’t look favorably on gays.

            The video we watched about the 3^rd gender was very strange and a bit humorous to me. I couldn’t even begin to comprehend this mixed gender of man and women. While this person may have some good qualities of both genders, in our culture, we would find such a thing horrendous and sick. I also didn’t really know that there was a difference between Gender and Sex. I thought the two were interchangeable. As the video shows, they are clearly two different things. I found the part where the narrator stated “If we need more women in the house, then we take one of the boys and make them a woman” very funny. I can’t imagine my parents telling me something like “Okay son we need another person to take care of your brother so you are now a girl.” While I see this practice as cruel and wrong, if it works for the Samoans, then it’s fine. This topic could lead us into the discussion of how God meant for only two genders, and we are not supposed to just create a third.

            This is similar to our class discussion today where we talked about feminist and women’s rights. We also talked about what feminine characteristics and masculine characteristics are, and how we are starting to integrate both aspects into both genders. While I think some of them are fine, like men crying some times and women participating in sports, I do think there needs to be a separation between the two. If we allow men to take on women’s characteristics, and vice versa we may end up only having one gender. I’m probably exaggerating, and it could actually be a good thing to mix into the other gender’s characteristics. There was an article on Yahoo today about a high school girl in Florida who was one of the top 100 players in the country. Not only is this female playing a male dominated sport, but she is also excelling at it, and was able to throw an 87mph fastball! The best part was that she was willing to cross the boundaries, and venture into something that she might be thought of as less attractive, or more masculine.

            We also did a worksheet this week focusing on the differences between males and females, and how each one comes about. I never really thought of gender as a mindset, but I can see how it kind of is. Girls, for example are taught at a very young age to like Barbie dolls, makeup, and the color pink. Boys are into sports, cars, and electronics. This was apparent in the toysrus activity. I remember when I was ten, my mother made me take piano lessons. I hated the idea and insisted on guitar. I was so resistant because I saw the piano as a feminine instrument, and the guitar was as male an instrument as it got. The article about the looking glass self also talks about how we give reasons to act a certain way. Our society may do things according to the status quo just because they do not want to be seen as different. Erving Goffman talks about how “Self consciousness is involved in using a disclaimer as a shield.” “I often say things like I’m not sure” or “I think”. Similarly when it comes to the status quo, we cannot break it or our shield will break apart and we will take on criticism. The article states that “The large scale systems of justification we call culture emerges with successive generations.” Similarly, our culture cannot be changed, and nor can the way we see gender and Sex. I do believe however that some of our customs are changing. Men are no longer the dominant member of many households. In my house for example, my mother has complete authority, and whatever she says my father must agree with. If we take a vote, I, my brother, and father each have one vote, and my mother has four votes.