Blog Post #13 What Else?

This is my final blog post and it is dedicated to Dr. Rhodes’ class. I loved loved loved this class. Can anyone say active learning? Every time I went to class I was fully engaged and would not even notice how much I was absorbing.  There were so many times that I said to myself after class “damn, that was a good conversation”. The class really felt like a place where you could ask questions without being judged. It’s also nice to have a professor who is able to answer almost every single one of those questions ;). I am so happy to have had the opportunity to take Dr. Rhodes’ class and equally as sad that it is ending. Anyone want more beers and banana nut muffins? Remember when we learned about power by making chair sculptures? Ugh, why can’t every class be in the school of social work? In addition to the wonderful subject matter and professor, all of my peers are beautiful people. I look forward to having more classes with all of you. Happy winter break!

Observation: Walking into Dr. Rhodes' class feels like a bunch of high fives.

Blog Post #12

Monday marked the very first time Iceland police have ever shot and killed someone. Generally Iceland police do not carry weapons because they feel that it is threatening. The man who was killed experienced a long history of mental illness. He had been making threats to his neighbors, prompting police to evacuate the building. The man began to fire shots at the police officers. A little over an hour later the police entered his apartment where he continued to fire shots at them. The shots that were fired in response fatally wounded the man. The police force has expressed regret and has extended condolences to the victim’s family. Most people in the nation are shocked at this incident. “Iceland enjoys a low crime rate – a unique product of its large stable middle class and its thorough screening requirements for gun permits, among other elements” (Grenoble, 2013). This marks the first police shooting that has resulted in death since the force began in 1944. What is more interesting to me is how many Americans are shocked that no one has ever been killed by the police. I showed many of my friends the article and they were in total disbelief. It is as if we’ve become accustomed to police being a violent force. There are so many police shootings that we don’t even hear about because we are taught that this kind of violence is protective. While in many instances it is indeed protecting citizens, there have been way too many innocent lives lost due to police violence.

Observation: Jonathan Ferrell, a 24-year-old former A&M Florida football player, was shot multiple times by police. He was running toward the police to ask for help after he’d been in a car accident.

Blog Post #11

Nelson Mandela died Thursday, December 5, 2013. South African President Jacob Zuma said of Mandela, “He is now resting. He is now at peace. Our nation has lost its greatest son. Our people have lost a father. What made Nelson Mandela great was precisely what made him human. We saw in him what we seek in ourselves” (Karimi, 2013). In recent months, Mandela battled many health issues including a recurring lung infection that led to many hospitalizations. “With advancing age and bouts of illness, Mandela retreated to a quiet life at his boyhood home in the nations Eastern Cape Province, where he said he was most at peace. He was later moved to his home in the Johannesburg suburb of Houghton, where he died” Karimi, 2013). Mandela was a man of peace, an apartheid revolutionary. “His defiance of white minority rule and incarceration for fighting against segregation focused the world’s attention on apartheid, the legalized racial segregation enforced by the South African government until 1994” (Karimi, 2013). After 27 years of imprisonment, Mandela served as President of South Africa from May 1994-June 1999. Despite rampant political violence before Mandela’s presidential term in 1994, South Africa avoided a civil war in part to the leadership of Nelson Mandala and former South African President F. W. de Klerk. When asked how he’d like to be remembered Mandela answered, “not as anyone unique or special,  but as part of a great team in this country that has struggled for many years, for decades and even centuries. The greatest glory of living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time you fall” (Karimi, 2013).

Observation: A moment of silence for Nelson Mandela.

Blog Post #10

Principal Amy Lacey of Hempstead Middle School in Texas is on leave this week after making an announcement over the intercom that students were no longer allowed to speak Spanish. Principal Lacey claimed that Spanish was causing disruptions in the classrooms. After the announcement was made many teachers even enforced the “rule”, threatening to write students up or send them to the principals office. For many of the students at Hempstead Spanish is their first language. Essentially, the principal gave the teachers permission to discriminate against the students. One eighth-grader Yedhany Gallegos recalls, “She was like no speaking Spanish. I was like that’s my first language. She said, well you can get out” (Edwards, 2013). The cherry on top is that it took over two weeks for the superintendent to send a letter home insisting, “neither the district or any campus has any policy prohibiting the speaking of Spanish” (Edwards, 2013). Also, the district has said that the principal is on leave with pay until “the appropriate action is determined” (Edwards, 2013).  I feel like it’s very obvious that the “appropriate action” would be to fire Ms. Lacey immediately. This is so discriminatory it’s insane to me that the school would even hesitate to fire her. This is the kind of discrimination that was practiced in the 60’s and 70’s. 50 years later, here we are.

Observation: Many Americans believe that English is the United States’ official language. The United States does not have an official language.

Blog Post #9

            California has recently passed a law to soften their three-strikes law. The three-strikes law was originally passed in the 1990’s after two young white women were murdered by men with violent criminal histories. America voted in a fit of anger to pass the three-strikes law.  Essentially a third offense after two violent felony crimes could land someone in prison with a 25 year-life sentence. “Under the statute the third offense that could result in a life sentence could be any number of low-level felony convictions, like stealing a jack from the back of a tow truck, shoplifting a pair of work gloves from a department store, pilfering small change from a parked car or passing a bad check” (Staple, 2012). The law spread to 24 other states by 1996 and resulted in grossly overpopulated prisons. “As it turned out, three strikes created a cruel, Kafkaesque criminal justice system that lost all sense of proportion, doling out life sentences disproportionately to black defendants” (Staple, 2012). At the time that the three-strikes law was put on the ballot “a few noted criminologists predicted that “three strikes” laws, which would sweep the nation, were unlikely to have much effect on crime, would fill the nation’s prisons to bursting and would satisfy frustrating voters at the expense of bad public policy. They were largely ignored” (Gross, 2013). Personally, I can’t understand how it’s taken this long for California to revise this law. While I am sympathetic with both of the victim’s families, their fathers should not have been the ones writing legislation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/02/booming/born-of-grief-three-strikes-laws-are-being-rethought.html?ref=us&_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/opinion/sunday/california-horror-stories-and-the-3-strikes-law.html?_r=0

Observation: 10 years after the law was passed nearly half of the three-strikes offenders were serving 25 yr-life sentences for petty crimes.

Blog Post #8

Just to clarify, I am a white girl. If it seems that I am trying to speak on behalf of any persons of color I sincerely apologize. My intention is to spread awareness to people with privileges similar to my own and foster discussion. Recently I read an article on Thought Catalog about Katy Perry’s performance at the AMA’s. The article was written by YH Park, a Korean American woman. She was writing about how offensive and culturally appropriating the performance was. Perry was “in full-fledged yellowface: Pale skin, eye make-up that made her eyes look sharper, lips stylized like those in old Asian paintings of Geishas and her background dancers’ make-up was even more exaggerated” (Park, 2013). Park states that the performance is “another reminder as to why [she has] been made to feel excluded in a country that [she] was born in” (Park, 2013). Performances like these have been a popular trend among celebrities recently (see Miley, Selena, Gwen etc.). I believe these performances are indicative of the racism/cultural appropriation/white privilege that persists today in white America. The act of using people of color as accessories to propel a white celebrities own fame/fortune is not uncommon. “The people performing and in the media hold a lot of power to change societal perceptions, so when they choose to degrade and objectify a culture, they are perpetuating future stigmatization of upcoming generations of that culture” (Park, 2013). The problem is that these celebrities have extreme influence over the interactions between everyday individuals. The celebrity’s white fan base/other white people who happen to tap into pop culture every now and then will see this objectification of other cultures as okay, further perpetuating racism/white privilege. They will try to justify this behavior with “appreciating a culture” but Park states that “there is a difference between cultural appreciation and simplifying to spread awareness and accurate facts about a culture”. As Park so aptly puts it “white people, stop trying to be anything other than white”.

http://thoughtcatalog.com/yheepark/2013/12/dear-white-performers-stop-trying-to-be-anything-other-than-white/

Observation: The people making counter-arguments in the comments section of the article are white. *rolls eyes*

Blog Post #7

Today in my Orgs and Comms class we watched Lemn Sissay’s TED talk. Sissay is now a British author and broadcaster. From society’s standards he leads a very successful life and many may not guess that he was raised in the foster care system. Lemn told his own moving story of growing up as a child of the state. His mother was young and unwed when she was pregnant with him. After immigrating to the UK she was pressured to give her child up to the foster care system. Lemn experienced feelings of loneliness, longing for a family or anyone who knew him for more than a year. With no one to advocate for or speak on his behalf, he was mistreated and even institutionalized for over a year (a consequence for spilling paint). The emphasis of his talk was on the fact that children who are raised in the foster care system, adopted, or orphaned feel compelled to hide their backgrounds, “as if their background’s will somehow weaken their footing in their foreground.” Sissay wishes to change this so that children of the state are able to proudly claim their stories. His talk made me think about the issues with the foster care system. What I’ve gathered from his TED talk and other classes is that separating a child from their family is not the solution. We need to instead provide resources for those who are less fortunate so that they may empower themselves and become stronger parents.

Observation: Less than 3% of children in the foster care system will go to college.

Blog Post #6 You Can't Be Serious

Vanessa Vandyke, a 12-year-old girl living in Orlando, Florida has made the news this week. After beginning to wear her hair naturally, kids at her school began to make fun of her hairstyle. Vanessa went to the school’s principal to complain about the teasing. Instead of disciplining the bullies at her school, the authorities have threatened Vanessa with expulsion. Specifically, the school’s rulebook states “hair must be a natural color and must not be a distraction for example: mohawks, shaved signs, rat tails etc.” Because Vanessa’s hair is COMPLETELY NATURAL it seems that the school is claiming that her NATURAL APPEARNCE IS DISTRACTING. The school’s response is wrong on so many different levels. First, threatening Vanessa with expulsion is victim blaming. Rather than placing responsibility on the bullies, the school is punishing Vanessa for the actions of her peers. The school needs to reprimand the students bullying Vanessa so that her beautiful head of hair may walk down the halls without being burdened by the plebeians’ thoughts. This issue is also implicit of a much larger issue in our society. The natural appearance of any human should never be labeled as “distracting”. Especially in the professional world, people who do not have straight hair are often seen as unprofessional, particularly African Americans. Many feel the same pressures as Vanessa to straighten their hair for fear of unemployment. Policing someone’s natural appearance is the dumbest thing ever. Honestly, I hope that Vanessa continues her fight so that the Supreme Court has an opportunity to make an example of this embarrassment of an institution by smacking them down with the fist of justice. 

http://www.clutchmagonline.com/2013/11/little-girl-faces-expulsion-natural-hair/

Observation: As I was reading the article about Vanessa Vandyke my eyeballs melted out of my skull because they were so disgusted with the fact that anyone would ever want her to change her beautiful hair. Time for a couple of beers and a banana nut muffin.

Blog #5

Photographer/journalist Petra Collins recently designed a t-shirt for American Apparel. The shirt caused much controversy because of the image she designed and printed onto it. The image is a simplistic line drawing that depicts a masturbating, menstruating woman with pubic hair. Reactions to the shirt included “vile”, “icky”, “disgusting”, “horrible”, etc. Many media outlets such as Time, the Daily Mail, and the Huffington Post have written articles about the shirt trying to “figure out the controversy”. The problem with Petra’s t-shirt is not that there is a naked woman on the t-shirt. We can see by visiting urban outfitters that women’s naked bodies are on t-shirts all the time. 

• http://www.urbanoutfitters.com/urban/catalog/productdetail.jsp?id=29337078&parentid=M_APP_TEESSHORT
• http://www.urbanoutfitters.com/urban/catalog/productdetail.jsp?id=27481100&parentid=M_APP_TEESSHORT
• http://www.urbanoutfitters.com/urban/catalog/productdetail.jsp?id=24586349&parentid=M_APP_TEESSHORT
• http://www.urbanoutfitters.com/urban/catalog/productdetail.jsp?id=28820116&parentid=M_APP_TEESSHORT

The difference between these t-shirts and Petra Collins t-shirt is that on Petra’s shirt the woman is no longer a sexual object. The woman on the shirt is completely natural (a major taboo) and not hiding the fact that she is menstruating (another major taboo). It can also be inferred that because the woman is masturbating she is receiving sexual pleasure. This in itself is a societal taboo, but the cherry on top of Petra’s shirt is that there is no man involved. Ultimately, the t-shirt denies the male gaze. A woman is pleasuring herself in her most natural state, and because she is no longer sexualized for the purposes of pleasing a male, it is seen as “offensive”.

Interview with Petra Collins about t-shirt: http://www.vice.com/read/chatting-with-petra-collins-about-her-menstruating-vagina-shirt

Observation: Countless horror films with scenes depicting sexual violence against women are rated PG-13 while the film “Blue Valentine” was rated NC-17 because a woman receives oral sex. 

Blog Post #4

Last week in my social inequality class we were talking about the glass ceiling, sexism, and gender. My teacher was looking at female dominated occupations compared to male dominated occupations. The first slide in the power point gave examples of female dominated occupations: cashier, teacher, and nurse. He asked what the similarities between these occupations were. The class said that the majority of the jobs were care giving, and service jobs. The next slide gave examples of male dominated occupations. Most of the jobs were prestigious: lawyer, engineer, and doctor. When our professor asked us what the difference was between the male dominated careers compared to the female dominated careers a girl sitting in the front row raised her hand and said, “these jobs actually require you to think.” Initially I reacted angrily. I raised my hand and called her out on the comment she had made. Despite her immediate attempt to back pedal it angered me that another woman had made such a blatantly sexist comment and that my professor had not done anything about it. However, as I thought about it more I realized that it was not her fault. The reason oppression is so successful is because it is internalized. As stereotypes of women are maintained in the media, in our schools, at our jobs, and even in our own homes how could I expect anyone to deviate from those beliefs? You see women making rules for other women; don’t dress like that, don’t talk like that, act like a lady. With these rules coming from the media, your family, and other women, breaking the cycle seems like an arduous if not impossible task.

Observation: When my sociology teacher shows excerpts of sitcoms demonstrating sexism on TV, the class will still laugh at the jokes.

Blog Post #3

Today in class we listened to a radio segment featuring a couple from South Africa. The two were white affluent and upper middle class. They decided to go live in an impoverished predominantly black neighborhood for a month to “experience what the people lived like”. The fact that they were only in the community for a month makes me doubt that they gained any life changing “experience”. You can’t really integrate yourself into the community in four weeks. I think it also is an example of privileged people exoticizing the lives of real people and minimizing the quality of their lives because they don’t have any money. They received much criticism from their friends and family as well as people following their blogs and twitter. It frustrates me that they didn’t actually do anything to try and improve the community. They just went into the community to observe how “terrible” it was and then went back to their nice homes. This makes it seem like all they wanted to do was have a cool story to share with their friends and family. It would have also been better to hear from the community itself. As people who are not in the community by any means, it is really not their place to speak for that community.

Observation: My social justice teacher said she was telling a story and told her friends it was about a white man. Her friends asked her why she mentioned that the man was white.

Blog Post #2

This past Monday in class we did two exercises. The first was an exercise where the class had to stand in the middle of the room. Our teacher would then read out instructions for us such as: “place your hand on someone you are close to” or “place your hand on someone who has more power than you” or even “place your hand on someone you feel shy around”. This exercise was really interesting because it required you to tear down any barriers you had about power or class or race or your emotions down. Sometimes the game made you feel uncomfortable. It was hard to admit that you felt someone near you held more power than you not only because of your own vulnerability but because in the real world we are taught not to admit these things. The next exercise was a play on power. Our teacher pulled 5 identical chairs into the middle of the room and we were to construct the chairs in such a way that one chair appeared to have “more power” than the other 4 chairs. The game had an ominous feel to it. The sound of the chairs dragging on the floor was loud and dramatic. Then one of the chairs would really appear to “be in charge” of the other chairs. More than anything it was interesting to see people come up with arrangements I had not thought of myself. The most memorable to me was one of the first arrangements. Our teacher had placed four chairs in a row and one chair “sitting” in front of them facing them. I had thought of turning the “power chair” around to face away from them so it appeared as if that chair was leading the others. Next, another boy in my class took the “power chair” and placed it behind the row so that it appeared that it was watching the other four chairs. It was something that I hadn’t thought of at all and seemed even more powerful. After the class I was talking to one of my classmates, Kaleigh, about the exercises. Both Kaleigh and I live in cooperative housing. We began talking about the way that power is divided in our own homes, whether it is through proper election, or in some cases through the overpowering of someone’s personality. It really made me think about how there is this notion of cooperation and equality in our houses, we all pay rent, we all make decisions, but there is a power dynamic. The person in charge of the kitchen and the meals that we eat has a lot of power that I’d never considered before. It’s interesting to see how I could overlook power dynamics in my own home so easily. It almost frightens me to think about what power dynamics I am overlooking in "real" life.

Observation: When you shop at buffalo exchange you can either take a bag for your purchased clothes or choose to donate the cost of the bag to a charity.

Blog Post #1

This week we watched Dan Pallotta's Ted Talk on non-profits titled "The Way We Think About Charity is Dead Wrong". I found the talk to be very powerful and enlightening. As someone who is very passionate and supportive of the non-profit sector, I was almost ashamed that I'd never thought of some of his main points of view. The premise of his argument is that society’s view on the world of charity and non-profits is so warped that it is almost impossible for any non-profit to grow, profit, and ultimately succeed at a global or even national scale.  There were five main points in his discussion and as he would review them I would think to myself, "Wow, how obvious, why have I never come to that conclusion myself". I found especially interesting his point about salary. In a nutshell, he is talking about the way society views non-profits. His belief is that people are confusing immorality with making money. He goes onto say that society is more than happy to put a man on the cover of a magazine for selling violent video games to children, but God forbid we congratulate someone with a decent salary for raising a lot of money for cancer research. “We have a visceral reaction to the idea that anyone would make very much money helping other people. Interesting that we don't have a visceral reaction to the notion that people would make a lot of money NOT helping other people.” When it comes down to it, the fact of the matter is that no one with the talent or drive to help a non-profit succeed is going to want to work for a non-profit because their salary will not match the work that they put into the company. Thus, people with talent and drive will end up working for “for-prof” companies that will pay them what they deserve. Then, at the end of the day they can just donate money to the non-profs, if they feel compelled to do so. The reason this is important can be summed up in one of my favorite quotes from the talk. Pallotta says, “Philanthropy is the market for love. It is the market for all those people for whom there is no other market coming.” This really helped shed some more light on my place in social work. The field is so important to so many people. Not to sound cliché, even on a really small scale you are making a difference. And it seems so obvious to me that punishing non-profit organizations for paying their employees a reasonable amount is counterproductive. Yet, here we are having a discussion on the subject. When it’s all said and done the road is long and arduous but it is a fight that must be fought. 

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pallotta_the_way_we_think_about_charity_is_dead_wrong.html?quote=2084

.
Observation: I saw a homeless man sitting outside of Plucker's watching the football games on the flat screen TV's inside. No one inside payed attention to the man.