It has been an interesting semester for blogging! To start off, I'd like to address the themes of my blogging. This semester I found myself writing a lot about fairness in one way or another and being fortunate. I wrote a blog about how overweight people are misrepresented, how African Americans are misrepresented, and how world disasters do not get the attention they deserve when it's all said and done. Twice I found myself comparing New Trier to inner city schools and writing about how lucky I am to go to New Trier: once about our unlimited library resources and once comparing cafeterias.
My posts have become increasingly longer throughout the semester and I attribute this to Junior Theme. The process of writing a post became much longer because I found myself doing much more research behind my posts than I did before (this says a lot because before I usually did about 30 mins). For some reason I now read so much more on a topic before I blog about it as if each blog post is a mini junior theme. For example in order to write my latest post I ended up listening to 20 stories on storycorps to find the best ones to use. And for this post, I first found the article about the new Dove deodorant, then researched cellulite, then flipped through a bunch of Seventeen magazines(guilty) in order to have everything I needed to write the blog. Looking back at many of my blogs like that one I realize that they could have been split into two blogs or even three sometimes.
I remember the first week of blogging. I texted Emma Murray because I was excited that I had found the perfect topic for my blog. I used a topic from class, had some research, made a personal connection, etc but rereading it I find myself liking my most recent work the best even if the posts don't have all the criteria the very first one had. One thing I said I'd work on this semester in my second quarter meta post was that of not asking questions but instead writing in a manner that begs a question without saying so. Most of my blogs now either ask a leading question in the beginning and then explore the possible answers or do not ask a question at all. American Dream, Upper or Lower class?, Dying Rich, Dying Alone, Bringing Lunch to School: a privilege? . None of these posts end with a question. The other change to my blogging is that the writing comes much more effortlessly. At the beginning of the year I was so self conscious I would think hard about what exactly I was writing. Now it is easy and I feel like my blogs flow so much better and the writing is so much better.
I'm sorry for another super long post! But one last thing...I would've never guessed that blogging would become so comfortable. The thought of having to put my work on the internet for others to see practically scared me half to death at the beginning of the year. This whole experience has really opened me up and I am now considering making a new blog for fun. If you had told me sophomore year that I would want to write for fun I would've thought you were kidding. I've never written for fun before creating this blog and I think that the enjoyment is what made my posts so good and why I am so proud of them.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
Thursday, June 2, 2011
American Dream
In class we've been talking about the "American Dream" and what it is. We came up with many descriptions like going from rags to riches or just being in a better financial position than one started with. What I am more interested in is why America? And why is there an American dream in the first place?
I went back to the storycorps website that we were introduced to earlier in the year and started listening to the stories of Americans and more specifically, immigrants. Many people told of how excited they were to be in America when they first got here. This man said in his story that when he was 6 his mom immigrated to the US from the Dominican Republic and would send him postcards of New York (where she was). A few years later when it was his time to immigrate and live with her he said that he imagined he'd be living in a place like the ones he saw on the postcards. So instead of living in the Empire State Building he ended up living in a basement in West Harlem that opened into a space where people threw their garbage. But he was happy to be here anyway.
Many of the stories from immigrants noted how hard it was to immigrate and live here but yet they all made the choice to come. Perhaps they were in search of the American Dream. Or perhaps they came to America so they could dream.
One moving story (listen here) was a woman telling her daughter how she risked her life to cross the border and then had to work day and night to keep afloat. The daughter suggested that because of her parents struggles she knew that she could achieve her dream: finish college. She said,"It's the most important thing for me, having gone to college, and I feel like anything I do from here on out is ok because I've already achieved my dream. " In this case this woman may not have had the opportunity to go to college had she been raised back in Mexico which suggests that some dreams are only possible in America. One immigrant said he moved here with no money, no job, and no knowledge of English but it turned out that he invented a hot dog vending machine. He said, "It was a hard time but we knew [America] was the country of opportunity. I'm telling you, only in America can you have an idea and go and find people who believe in it as well to achieve something".
In all I think that there is an American Dream because we can dream. The possibilities are endless here. Maybe people want to accomplish the American Dream to prove that wherever they've come from they've reached success here. It's a goal. And it's amazing too. The American Dream has driven people from all over the world to America in search of it. If it weren't so special we would probably not be having the problem with border control. It is not as important what the American Dream actually is but more so that it is possible.
If anyone wants to listen to a story that makes you confused and puzzled, listen here. If anyone would like to explain this woman's actions to me please do because I think this may be one of the most unusual stories I've ever heard.
I went back to the storycorps website that we were introduced to earlier in the year and started listening to the stories of Americans and more specifically, immigrants. Many people told of how excited they were to be in America when they first got here. This man said in his story that when he was 6 his mom immigrated to the US from the Dominican Republic and would send him postcards of New York (where she was). A few years later when it was his time to immigrate and live with her he said that he imagined he'd be living in a place like the ones he saw on the postcards. So instead of living in the Empire State Building he ended up living in a basement in West Harlem that opened into a space where people threw their garbage. But he was happy to be here anyway.
Many of the stories from immigrants noted how hard it was to immigrate and live here but yet they all made the choice to come. Perhaps they were in search of the American Dream. Or perhaps they came to America so they could dream.
One moving story (listen here) was a woman telling her daughter how she risked her life to cross the border and then had to work day and night to keep afloat. The daughter suggested that because of her parents struggles she knew that she could achieve her dream: finish college. She said,"It's the most important thing for me, having gone to college, and I feel like anything I do from here on out is ok because I've already achieved my dream. " In this case this woman may not have had the opportunity to go to college had she been raised back in Mexico which suggests that some dreams are only possible in America. One immigrant said he moved here with no money, no job, and no knowledge of English but it turned out that he invented a hot dog vending machine. He said, "It was a hard time but we knew [America] was the country of opportunity. I'm telling you, only in America can you have an idea and go and find people who believe in it as well to achieve something".
In all I think that there is an American Dream because we can dream. The possibilities are endless here. Maybe people want to accomplish the American Dream to prove that wherever they've come from they've reached success here. It's a goal. And it's amazing too. The American Dream has driven people from all over the world to America in search of it. If it weren't so special we would probably not be having the problem with border control. It is not as important what the American Dream actually is but more so that it is possible.
If anyone wants to listen to a story that makes you confused and puzzled, listen here. If anyone would like to explain this woman's actions to me please do because I think this may be one of the most unusual stories I've ever heard.
Is something wrong?
Recently in class we saw a video of two reporters talking about a new product from Dove. What is this new product? Deodorant that makes your armpits prettier. Yes. According to this article from the Wall Street Journal, Dove is now advertising deodorant that has specialized moisturizers to help women achieve prettier armpits in just 5 days. Yes only 5. Amazing. Personally I had never even thought that armpits were something that could be considered pretty or ugly. I just thought they were a body part. But now it seems like Dove wants us to feel like we need "pretty" armpits when ironically they've always advertised that women should feel comfortable in their own skin. They even made an ad revealing the photo shopping used to create a standard ad in the hopes of informing viewers of our distorted image of beauty. Watch the video here (it's super surprising!). Yet now they are suggesting that women should be concerned with another part of their body being beautiful. It's just not right.
In the news Khloe Kardashian (a famous socialite/reality tv star for those who do not know her) "admitted" to having cellulite. (Article here). She "admitted" it. I'm definitely not surprised. And that is not because I think she is fat or at all overweight. It's because 90-95% of women have cellulite. Cellulite isn't just prevalent in people who are overweight because whether or not a person has it isn't based on weight. The heavier you are the more likely you are to have cellulite but in reality it happens when fat becomes trapped in the skin instead of under it. Beauty companies make it seem like cellulite is an gross abnormality that should be fixed even though it is a normal occurrence in women. Ironically when I was doing a little research about the prevalence of cellulite there was an ad on how to get rid of it.
In the news Khloe Kardashian (a famous socialite/reality tv star for those who do not know her) "admitted" to having cellulite. (Article here). She "admitted" it. I'm definitely not surprised. And that is not because I think she is fat or at all overweight. It's because 90-95% of women have cellulite. Cellulite isn't just prevalent in people who are overweight because whether or not a person has it isn't based on weight. The heavier you are the more likely you are to have cellulite but in reality it happens when fat becomes trapped in the skin instead of under it. Beauty companies make it seem like cellulite is an gross abnormality that should be fixed even though it is a normal occurrence in women. Ironically when I was doing a little research about the prevalence of cellulite there was an ad on how to get rid of it.
It seems as if the marketing strategy of beauty companies is to make you feel worse about yourself thus compelling you to buy products that would fix the so called problem that they say you have. They are even tricky about it too. If you look at the ad below which was in Cosmopolition magazine you'll see that it says "Spring Survival" and then suggest a bunch of products that will help you survive. Tricky tricky. First of all, I didn't even think I had a problem "surviving" spring. Why would I need to "survive"?
Upper or Lower class?
In a newspaper article in the Chicago Tribune that I saw last week there was an article about Rahm Emanuel and his family, coinciding with the start of Emanuel's job as mayor. It talked about how Rahm's parents raised him and a little about the family history. (Read it here). What I found interesting was that the article stressed that Rahm's relatives came from hardship, escaping the Nazi's when they immigrated to the US. The article stated that the parents, "granted the rare interview in their Wilmette home, the modest split-level where they have lived since the late '60s". The author didn't have to write "modest split-level home". I feel like this is almost trying to make it seem as if Rahm didn't grow up in a house that might be a standard north shore house in order to cover up the fact that by most people's standards he had a privileged childhood. In class, it seemed like many people felt the same way about their own wealth considering that a staggering 27 people said that they considered themselves in the middle class.
Although I am not criticizing anyone of the class they put themselves in, I must argue that by the standards of the test that Mr. Bolos took, I'd be surprised if anyone in our class was in anything lower then then the upper end of the upper middle. Of course I do not know everyone's personal information but using this test from the New York Times, I think most people in our class would at least be in Upper Middle. So what I am wondering is why so many people said Middle, and why saying whether you put middle or upper was so taboo in our class. People seem afraid to admit that they are wealthy (although I do recognize that some may have middle class because of standards other then wealth and education).
As for the Rahm Emanuel story, the author might have wanted to make Rahm Emanuel follow more of a rag to riches story or downplay the fact that he was raised on the North Shore, having been criticized heavily for that. In this campaign video (sorry I don't know how to embed it) he says "I'm glad we can help other middle class families send their kids to college" (at 1:00). It's like he is referring to himself as middle class. This was a reoccurring theme in his campaign; he was just a average person helping the other average person, average especially when it came to wealth. At the same time that the Chicago Tribune article came out, I saw an article in the Wilmette Life about how Rahm Emanuel had been back on the north shore for a charity event. I'm sorry that I don't have the article but my mom through the paper away and I can't find it online. Basically it was just saying that he had come back in Wilmette and was at a benefit. What struck me the most were the pictures. There were many pictures of what would be considered "upper class" attendees. To give the reader a better idea, imagine pictures like the one on the right, in the format of the picture to the left. Or basically imagine the people in the right super dressed up instead or country club dress (which is still very upper class looking). What I found interesting was that in the north shore newspaper, Rahm Emanuel was portrayed as being in the upper class. This suggests that he uses his appearance of wealth to fit in with people of a certain wealth. I'm just using him as an example, I feel like a lot of times wealth is used to fit in and that it is not properly represented. It seems as if our society forces it to be that way.
As for the Rahm Emanuel story, the author might have wanted to make Rahm Emanuel follow more of a rag to riches story or downplay the fact that he was raised on the North Shore, having been criticized heavily for that. In this campaign video (sorry I don't know how to embed it) he says "I'm glad we can help other middle class families send their kids to college" (at 1:00). It's like he is referring to himself as middle class. This was a reoccurring theme in his campaign; he was just a average person helping the other average person, average especially when it came to wealth. At the same time that the Chicago Tribune article came out, I saw an article in the Wilmette Life about how Rahm Emanuel had been back on the north shore for a charity event. I'm sorry that I don't have the article but my mom through the paper away and I can't find it online. Basically it was just saying that he had come back in Wilmette and was at a benefit. What struck me the most were the pictures. There were many pictures of what would be considered "upper class" attendees. To give the reader a better idea, imagine pictures like the one on the right, in the format of the picture to the left. Or basically imagine the people in the right super dressed up instead or country club dress (which is still very upper class looking). What I found interesting was that in the north shore newspaper, Rahm Emanuel was portrayed as being in the upper class. This suggests that he uses his appearance of wealth to fit in with people of a certain wealth. I'm just using him as an example, I feel like a lot of times wealth is used to fit in and that it is not properly represented. It seems as if our society forces it to be that way.
Dying Rich, Dying Alone
Recently in the news there have been stories about Hugette Clark's passing. But the many articles seem not to be talking about her life; more so, they talked about the money. The money she left behind, how much money she left behind, who will inherit the money she left behind, etc... Huguette Clark was the daughter of William A. Clark, a U.S. senator and Gilded Age copper magnate from Montana, who was reputed to be one of the two richest industrialists in the United States, rivaled only by John D. Rockefeller. She died recently alone in a New York hospital. She had apparently not left far her huge NYC apartment for 23 years never once visiting the estate in New Canaan, Connecticut that she bought in 1952 (its for sale at $24 million). In total she is estimated to be worth $500 million. To read more about her click here or here. But I think the most intriguing and sad thing is that she died alone. Apparently it was Ms Clark's specific wishes and instructions that no funeral service or mass be held. She even forbid any family to know when she was being buried. The only people at her burial were the funeral workers.
It is now unclear what will happen to her estate seeing that she has no children, was married only for a brief time, and has cut ties with relatives. These relatives have gone to court numerous times because they suspect the Ms. Clark's attorney and accountant, the only 2 people she kept contact with, took advantage of her wealth.
When I read about her I immediately thought, "Great Gatsby". He also died with boatloads of money and only a few people came to his funeral. Even Mr. Wolfsheim, whom we were led to believe was his friend, didn't want to go to his funeral. It seems as though when a person's wealth gets so astronomically large, they become business. What I mean by that is people are only in Gatsby's life for money and business not to be his friend. He gained attention because of his money which is now the same with Huguette Clark who is receiving attention because of her fortune and questions surrounding its fate. It's amazing how people can turn into money in the eyes of the world. I bet that if there was no mystery surrounding her fortune, Huguette's death would not have received nearly as much notoriety.
It is now unclear what will happen to her estate seeing that she has no children, was married only for a brief time, and has cut ties with relatives. These relatives have gone to court numerous times because they suspect the Ms. Clark's attorney and accountant, the only 2 people she kept contact with, took advantage of her wealth.
When I read about her I immediately thought, "Great Gatsby". He also died with boatloads of money and only a few people came to his funeral. Even Mr. Wolfsheim, whom we were led to believe was his friend, didn't want to go to his funeral. It seems as though when a person's wealth gets so astronomically large, they become business. What I mean by that is people are only in Gatsby's life for money and business not to be his friend. He gained attention because of his money which is now the same with Huguette Clark who is receiving attention because of her fortune and questions surrounding its fate. It's amazing how people can turn into money in the eyes of the world. I bet that if there was no mystery surrounding her fortune, Huguette's death would not have received nearly as much notoriety.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Bringing Lunch to School: a privilege?
Today in the Chicago Tribune, I read an article about how the public school in Chicago, Little Village Academy, banned bring lunch from home. This means that the students are forced to buy the school lunch unless they have a medical reason that requires them to bring their own lunch. Read the article here. The principal decided to implement this rule after "watching students bring 'bottles of soda and flaming hot chips' for lunch." The principal also said, "It's about the nutrition and the excellent quality food that they are able to serve (in the lunchroom). It's milk versus a Coke." At Little Village most of the students only have the option to take the lunch or go hungry. If the student does not qualify for free or reduced price lunches they would have to pay $2.25 for a lunch they don't necessarily like. But on the otherhand if a student is bringing a very unhealthy lunch, it would benefit their health to eat a healthier lunch everyday.
This is a very interesting situation because it asks the question: what role should the government play in individual food choices? But what I find even more interesting is that the situation is almost comepletely reversed at New Trier. Personally I've always thought that people who brought their lunch ate healthier lunches as opposed to the fries, Uncrustables, chips, and soda that many New Trier students eat for lunch. I just so happen to be part of the group that brings their lunch to school and my lunches are almost always really healthy. Its only when I buy lunch that they are unhealthy. Correct me if I'm wrong but I've always been under the impression that bringing a lunch is healthier, like this poster suggests:
Forcing the kids to eat the school lunches would make sure that they were eating something healthy but then again they might choose to not eat anything at all if they don't like the options. And the fact that they have to "force" the kids to eat healthier lunches doesn't seem right either.Overall I think that the school trying to get kids to eat healthier is great, I'm just not sure the school went about it the right way.
This is a very interesting situation because it asks the question: what role should the government play in individual food choices? But what I find even more interesting is that the situation is almost comepletely reversed at New Trier. Personally I've always thought that people who brought their lunch ate healthier lunches as opposed to the fries, Uncrustables, chips, and soda that many New Trier students eat for lunch. I just so happen to be part of the group that brings their lunch to school and my lunches are almost always really healthy. Its only when I buy lunch that they are unhealthy. Correct me if I'm wrong but I've always been under the impression that bringing a lunch is healthier, like this poster suggests:
I am all for trying to prevent and fix childhood obesity but I think that the actions that the school took might have been slightly too drastic. I think maybe a better approach would've been to inform parents about the importance of a healthy lunch and ask them to make sure their son or daughter has a healthy lunch. But at the same time I feel like I can argue for the ban because I'm assuming that the children at this Chicago public school do not come from wealthy families. Kids might be bringing unhealthy lunches to school because they are cheaper. You can get a 12 pk of soda for $5 whereas a 12 pk of milk (and only 1/2 of the ounces of soda) costs $15. You can get 10 packaged hot dogs totaling 16 oz for $3 but only 9 oz of cut turkey for $5.
Forcing the kids to eat the school lunches would make sure that they were eating something healthy but then again they might choose to not eat anything at all if they don't like the options. And the fact that they have to "force" the kids to eat healthier lunches doesn't seem right either.Overall I think that the school trying to get kids to eat healthier is great, I'm just not sure the school went about it the right way.
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Search
Junior Theme has been going pretty smoothly except for one major speed bump: I don't know what to search. The librarians have done an excellent job showing us how to do advanced searches and get exactly what you are looking for but my problem is figuring out what words to put in the search. In one subtopic of my research I have been able to find huge amounts of information because there is a specific category that I am looking under and not much variation. The topic is prescription drug advertising. But one of the other parts, diagnosis, I am having real difficulty because there is such a brood spectrum of what diagnosis includes and I am not sure on the best way to narrow it down. If I search something like "diagnostic tools and prescription drugs" there is a lot that comes up but a lot is specific to cancer or still way too broad. What I am looking for is information on how tools of diagnosis have improved which could possibly be a reason why more people are on prescription drugs then in previous decades. I'm sure I will end up finding something that works but for now I will just have to keep on searching.
Monday, March 21, 2011
GloZell
I came across a video commenting on Rebecca Black's "Friday" music video by GloZell. For those of you who do not know who GloZell is or have never seen any of her video's, she is a comedian who has posted over 1000 videos and her most popular ones are commentaries on popular music or people. Watch a funny video of her commenting of Kesha's "Tik Tok" here. Recently I saw a link for her newest video about her "Friday" video and in it she points out that Rebecca Black has a token black rapper in her video. Glozell talks about it roughly from about 3:23 to 4:05. Watch it here. Its interesting that even in music videos there are token characters.
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Resources Resources
Even though I've been dreading Junior Theme, this week it occurred to me how lucky we are to be able to write such a complex paper and the resources we have to write it. I'll start by pointing out the obvious: we have computers. I don't know about you but I remember when we had a former student stop by during class first semester and tell us that he is teaching in a place where there is only one computer in the entire town. If I had to guess I'd say that we have close to 200 computers and laptops for students to use (but don't quote me on that). It would be pretty hard to write a 5-7 page paper by hand and then revising that paper.
vs 
But even with a computer we would need books and that is where the library comes in. Our library is one of the biggest of any schools in the area and I don't remember the number (I'll post it after I ask) but we have a TON of books. While I was trying to find a book to read on my topic I found a good one but we we didn't have it in our school library. Ms. Gressel asked me give her the name of the book and she ordered it for the school library (too bad it won't be in time for me to read it). Just like that it was done. This is a harsh contrast of some of the schools even just 20 miles away. I found this article from a newsletter in the Austin area of Chicago (its a very very poor and dangerous part of the city) and it says that "164 Chicago public schools lack a library " . That is an incredibly high number and could you imagine how we would write or Junior theme without a library or the help of a librarian? And even if a school has a library it is most likely not funded well. The article says that some schools might have a library but not one librarian to work there. and that "Spending on school libraries in high-poverty areas has dropped 25 percent in the past year, from an average of $13,935 in 2009 to $10,378 in 2010." Now here comes the most shocking part. Ms. Gressel informed me that our library spends $50,000 on databases, ebooks, and online encyclopedias alone. It just goes to show how lucky we are to have the resources we do. If we didn't have them, who knows if we'd be doing Junior Theme.
vs 
Junior Theme: Part One
This week in AS we started junior theme. For me it was very very very difficult to pick a topic and it took me 3 days to finally settle on one. Going through all of my potential research topics I realized that there is so much information about current issues that I have no idea about. My list of questions reached almost 25 in total and I'm positive that there were millions of other questions I could have come up with. For a teenager who thinks she know everything (like most other teenagers)I just thought it was almost a wake up call for me to learn more about current issues. I am now really excited to read my fellow classmates' papers.
The topic/ question I decided on was: Why has the number of Americans on prescription drugs increased so much in the past decade? It is a surprisingly interesting topic and it has been really easy to find research. Now my only problem is narrowing it down. There are too many medicines to generalize the use of them because consider Viagra: it has only been around for less then a decade so shouldn't its number be increasing? And do I argue that the increase in number of people on antidepressants has increased because of advertisement or that diagnosis is much better? So at this point I am confused as to which way to start to narrow my topic. And it needs to be done because after all, we can only have 5-7 pages.
The topic/ question I decided on was: Why has the number of Americans on prescription drugs increased so much in the past decade? It is a surprisingly interesting topic and it has been really easy to find research. Now my only problem is narrowing it down. There are too many medicines to generalize the use of them because consider Viagra: it has only been around for less then a decade so shouldn't its number be increasing? And do I argue that the increase in number of people on antidepressants has increased because of advertisement or that diagnosis is much better? So at this point I am confused as to which way to start to narrow my topic. And it needs to be done because after all, we can only have 5-7 pages.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Tokenism:An unanswered question
Before our class presentations started Mr. Bolos and Mr. O'Connor posed an interesting question: is tv tokenism a problem? Recently I've been thinking about this and have not come up with a clear answer.
After seeing many people's presentations it was clear that the token black character gets little screen time and is not a developed character. Personally I think it would almost be better if the black character were not in the authority position but instead tv shows gave a more realistic approach and showed the view a deeper side to the black character. I do not want to sound like I am saying that blacks cannot achieve high level positions but did you know that over the course of history that there have been only 8 CEO's of Fortune 500 companies? and only 6 African American senators in history? I feel like tv stations are doing a disservice to stopping racism and stereotypes by portraying so many blacks in unusual positions. TV tokenism in this sense is bad. If a show wants to have a token minority character why not show a hard working mom or a family having trouble adjusting to living in a primarily white suburb? Basically my point is that we should be showing the opposite of the stereotypes not special exceptions. Sure showing a black CEO is great but that doesn't really break down any stereotypes because I don't think that there are any stereotypes about black CEOs. In my opinion it just make me think how rare they actually are.
After seeing many people's presentations it was clear that the token black character gets little screen time and is not a developed character. Personally I think it would almost be better if the black character were not in the authority position but instead tv shows gave a more realistic approach and showed the view a deeper side to the black character. I do not want to sound like I am saying that blacks cannot achieve high level positions but did you know that over the course of history that there have been only 8 CEO's of Fortune 500 companies? and only 6 African American senators in history? I feel like tv stations are doing a disservice to stopping racism and stereotypes by portraying so many blacks in unusual positions. TV tokenism in this sense is bad. If a show wants to have a token minority character why not show a hard working mom or a family having trouble adjusting to living in a primarily white suburb? Basically my point is that we should be showing the opposite of the stereotypes not special exceptions. Sure showing a black CEO is great but that doesn't really break down any stereotypes because I don't think that there are any stereotypes about black CEOs. In my opinion it just make me think how rare they actually are.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Faster than the speed of news
It seems like nowadays news comes and goes in the blink of an eye and then is never approached until something major happens again. When I first saw the news about Japan and the devastating earthquake/tsunami I was shocked and then I thought, what is going on in Haiti?
But anyway, in Japan right now hundreds have been found dead and authorities expect that close to 1,000 people are missing but the number could definitely rise. Almost all news stations are saying the same things and HERE is an up to date article for the moment. According to many sources this could be one of the costliest natural disasters ever and danger is still looming as nuclear power plants are unstable and there are continuing aftershocks. I pray that Japan emerges ok.
Nevertheless back to my original point. What's happening with disasters like the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and what i'm about to focus about: Haiti?
Cholera has infected 252,640 people in Haiti as of today. I has killed 4672. Depending on the source, only 5-20% of the rubble has been cleared. Approximately 1.2 million people are still living in tents. One third of people do not have access to clean water and a quarter do not have access to a toilet (this is especially bad because one way cholera is spread is through feces). Most of these facts came from here and here. So why has this not been one of the centers of attention in the news? Sure there are other things going on in our country but it seems as if there is never a news article about Haiti rolling across my yahoo homepage even though they are still in a dire situation.
I think this speaks to how and what news is delivered to us as Americans. In our society today everything is so quick and fast pace that it would seem logical that what captures our attention has to move quickly also. One, to the next thing, to the next. What is happening with the oil spill cleanup? I'd be surprised if the estimated 5 million barrels of oil was cleaned up already. But the oil spill is long gone to a lot of Americans and the news stations that choose not to report about it. Our attention has run out.
So I'll leave with one final question: how long do you think it will take for the tsunami in Japan to become old news?
But anyway, in Japan right now hundreds have been found dead and authorities expect that close to 1,000 people are missing but the number could definitely rise. Almost all news stations are saying the same things and HERE is an up to date article for the moment. According to many sources this could be one of the costliest natural disasters ever and danger is still looming as nuclear power plants are unstable and there are continuing aftershocks. I pray that Japan emerges ok.
Nevertheless back to my original point. What's happening with disasters like the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, and what i'm about to focus about: Haiti?
Cholera has infected 252,640 people in Haiti as of today. I has killed 4672. Depending on the source, only 5-20% of the rubble has been cleared. Approximately 1.2 million people are still living in tents. One third of people do not have access to clean water and a quarter do not have access to a toilet (this is especially bad because one way cholera is spread is through feces). Most of these facts came from here and here. So why has this not been one of the centers of attention in the news? Sure there are other things going on in our country but it seems as if there is never a news article about Haiti rolling across my yahoo homepage even though they are still in a dire situation.
I think this speaks to how and what news is delivered to us as Americans. In our society today everything is so quick and fast pace that it would seem logical that what captures our attention has to move quickly also. One, to the next thing, to the next. What is happening with the oil spill cleanup? I'd be surprised if the estimated 5 million barrels of oil was cleaned up already. But the oil spill is long gone to a lot of Americans and the news stations that choose not to report about it. Our attention has run out.
So I'll leave with one final question: how long do you think it will take for the tsunami in Japan to become old news?
Sunday, February 27, 2011
Is Beyonce's photo "blackface"?
Recently in the news, Beyonce has been criticized for her pictures in the French fashion magazine L’Officiel Paris.The usually fair skinned singer's skin was painted darker (see the top two photos) which many of her critics say is offensive because it is akin to "blackface". Read more here. What they are referring to is a very racist aspect of American history when whites (and later blacks) used to put on minstrel shows.Minstrel shows were, as wikipedia state, "American entertainment consisting of comic skits, variety acts, dancing, and music, performed by white people in blackface or, especially after the Civil War, black people in blackface. Minstrel shows lampooned black people as ignorant, lazy, buffoonish, superstitious, joyous, and musical." Many people are saying that using "blackface" was outright offensive on Beyonce's part.
On the other side, according to the magazine this photo shoot was "a return to her African roots, as you can see on the picture, on which her face was voluntarily darkened. " According to most celeb news websites like this one, Beyonce was paying tribute to Fela Kuti, a Nigerian musician and human rights activist, whose music she is using as inspiration for her next album.
Personally I feel like it is hard for me to argue either way. I question whether they are treating blackness as "fashion" or some sort of accessory. I am also wondering why, if she wanted to pay homage to her African roots, why she didn't actually wear clothes from Africa. As it turns out it was her mom that designed some of the dresses. The other thing that also keeps me from completely liking the photos is that Africans are of varying hues and I feel as if she is reducing a continent into one color. But am I really in the position to say so? I am not an African American and I have no idea how this may or may not be offensive to an African American. I also feel like I am not in the position to criticize Beyonce for paying a tribute to her African roots. So when can someone of one race comment on something related to another? Is this just another racial boundary that hasn't been crossed?
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Misrepresented or Unrepresented
Recently in class we've been discussing the portrayal of African Americans in the media which coincidentally comes at the same time as the oscar nominations consisting of not one African American this year. Interestingly while I was looking into this topic I came upon an article talking about the increase of African Americans in commercials but how the portrayals are stereotyping black women. (Click here) The author writes that the stereotypical overweight black woman "typically finds herself in an exchange that is either confrontational or embarrassing. And her best line is often little more than a sassy “Mmmm hmmm.” The article also says that, "over the last 15 years the number of blacks appearing in commercials has been roughly proportional to their share of the American population, about 14 percent." It's good that blacks are no longer underrepresented in terms of population but is it still ok if they are being misrepresented?
What is interesting is that even though African Americans are prevalent in commercials, this year they are extremely underrepresented in the film industry. According to this article (also from NY Times), the Oscar nominated movies are " more racially homogenous — more white — than the 10 films that were up for best picture in 1940". I find this very sad in the fact that we elected a African American president but don't even have ONE African American up for an Oscar. If we take both commercials and movies together, we are getting a misrepresented and an underrepresented portrayal of African Americans. Of course there are exceptions in both cases and I know I am being very general but have we really progressed in our portrayal of African Americans throughout US history? The latest movies that are in theaters: I am Number Four- blond actors; Gnomeo and Juliet -white gnomes; and Big Mammas: Like Father, Like Son- African American actors. But interestingly it seems like in Big Mamma: Like Father, Like Son they are only fueling stereotypes.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Where are the overweight people?
In class few weeks ago we watched a clip of a news anchor whose body was in full view opposed to the man she was interviewing who could only be seen from the chest up. It seemed as if the news program was using the anchor for her attractiveness. Something interesting came to mind: do we ever see overweight or unattractive people on tv?
I did a little research on "how to become a news anchor" and found that most websites stated that people in college go for a undergraduate degree in communications or journalism. Then they work their way up from interning to new reporter to anchor.( see this link). What I found to be particularly peculiar is the fact that almost no website ever stated that a new anchor must be somewhat attractive. Each made it seem like anyone could eventually become one. A recent article states that more than 6 in 10 Americans are overweight or obese. If very few news anchors are overweight (if you were to search "overweight news anchor" into Google no overweight anchors come up), then theoretically couldn't only the 40% of healthy weight people have the chance to become news anchors? This brings me to my biggest question: Why are there few overweight people on tv, besides the shows specifically about overweight people? There are TONS of shows now that are solely about people losing weight and being overweight but it there ever an overweight person on tv where their weight isn't the main focus?
Personally I feel like the only way an overweight person can get on tv is if their weight is the main focus. Shows like "The biggest Loser" "I Used to be Fat" "Too Fat for 15" "Huge" and "Dance Your Ass Off" are all based off of people being overweight. I have yet to see a truly overweight main character on the Disney Channel. Most of the shows on Disney Channel are supposed to be about normal kids, but if 1 out of 3 kids are overweight, how realistic is that? They show kids in high school but why are there few overweight people in the hallway?
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Meta-Post: 2nd Quarter
Mr. Bolos and Mr. O'Connor - I'd like you to grade "Raised Hands of Girls Decreasing Over Time?"
This quarter my blog has developed into pieces of complex writing. I've noticed that in many of my most recent blogs I am analyzing numbers. This doesn't surprise me considering I love math. But what I think makes these posts particularly better than ones in the past is that I write a complete analysis of those numbers. I am not giving the readers a statistic and then immediately asking readers what they think. Instead I answer the question I pose and ask my readers for their opinion. In my blog post "North, South, East, or Race: Teen Pregnancy", I ask the question, "Why do certain regions have higher [teen pregnancy] rates?" and go on to explain that I believe its just purely a cycle. In one of my first quarter posts, "Slavery in Modern Day America", I give a statistic about the number of prostitutes in the US and then immediately after, ended my blog with a question. It didn't leave any opinion for someone to comment on which is something I've tried to work on this quarter.
Something I'd like to work on in the future is making my blogs more controversial so that I won't need to ask so many questions but instead have people comment because my statement compels them to add their opinion. The one post I think I did a good job of this is "Body Scanners: A Breach of our Freedom?". I ended this post saying, "I'd rather go through body scanner than have a plane blow up." I didn't need to pose a question in order to receive responses. I got 2 comments. I am going to try and do this in more and more of my posts in the future.
Even though I am disappointed in the number of posts I wrote this quarter (I wish I would've done more than 1 per week), I must say that I am proud in the fact that most of my posts are well thought out and even encroach on the side of being too long. One of my more recent posts, "CEO", is lengthy but at the same time I do not feel as if I ramble on and on. First I give statistics about what I'm going to be discussing, next I set up the problem that I'm going to be analyzing, then I give my analysis and back it up with evidence. I feel like this is a dramatic improvement from my "Life Graphs" post from the beginning of the year where all I did is describe what we are talking about in class and posed a question.
Blogging has definitely forced me to explore the issues in the news and I am glad that we get the chance to connect school with the world around us. I am looking forward to writing more blogs!
This quarter my blog has developed into pieces of complex writing. I've noticed that in many of my most recent blogs I am analyzing numbers. This doesn't surprise me considering I love math. But what I think makes these posts particularly better than ones in the past is that I write a complete analysis of those numbers. I am not giving the readers a statistic and then immediately asking readers what they think. Instead I answer the question I pose and ask my readers for their opinion. In my blog post "North, South, East, or Race: Teen Pregnancy", I ask the question, "Why do certain regions have higher [teen pregnancy] rates?" and go on to explain that I believe its just purely a cycle. In one of my first quarter posts, "Slavery in Modern Day America", I give a statistic about the number of prostitutes in the US and then immediately after, ended my blog with a question. It didn't leave any opinion for someone to comment on which is something I've tried to work on this quarter.
Something I'd like to work on in the future is making my blogs more controversial so that I won't need to ask so many questions but instead have people comment because my statement compels them to add their opinion. The one post I think I did a good job of this is "Body Scanners: A Breach of our Freedom?". I ended this post saying, "I'd rather go through body scanner than have a plane blow up." I didn't need to pose a question in order to receive responses. I got 2 comments. I am going to try and do this in more and more of my posts in the future.
Even though I am disappointed in the number of posts I wrote this quarter (I wish I would've done more than 1 per week), I must say that I am proud in the fact that most of my posts are well thought out and even encroach on the side of being too long. One of my more recent posts, "CEO", is lengthy but at the same time I do not feel as if I ramble on and on. First I give statistics about what I'm going to be discussing, next I set up the problem that I'm going to be analyzing, then I give my analysis and back it up with evidence. I feel like this is a dramatic improvement from my "Life Graphs" post from the beginning of the year where all I did is describe what we are talking about in class and posed a question.
Blogging has definitely forced me to explore the issues in the news and I am glad that we get the chance to connect school with the world around us. I am looking forward to writing more blogs!
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Raised hands of girls decreasing over time?
Continuing the topic of girls in present day society, I've come across an interesting question about myself: why don't I raise my hand as much any more? When I was in elementary and middle school, if I knew the answer to a question my teacher asked (which, trying not to sound egotistical, was quite often), you could be sure that my hand would shoot straight up at an alarming speed. Remembering my former years in school, my "childhood", I feel strange thinking about how much I loved to raise my hand. I was never aware nor did I care about what other people thought. And come to think about it, I'd like to say that more of girls raised their hands more often too. But why then and not now?
I can think of two specific instances where girls dumb down in the oh so popular movie Mean Girls and Disney's popular High School Musical (one of my favorite of all time no doubt). "Mean Girls" portrays an intelligent and also beautiful high school girl wanting a relationship and this relationship is with one of the popular jocks. In pursuing the relationship, she deliberately fails math tests so she can get him to tutor her. The other instance in "High School Musical" is when Gabriella, arguable one of the smartest girls at the school, covers up her intelligence to win over Troy.
I can think of two specific instances where girls dumb down in the oh so popular movie Mean Girls and Disney's popular High School Musical (one of my favorite of all time no doubt). "Mean Girls" portrays an intelligent and also beautiful high school girl wanting a relationship and this relationship is with one of the popular jocks. In pursuing the relationship, she deliberately fails math tests so she can get him to tutor her. The other instance in "High School Musical" is when Gabriella, arguable one of the smartest girls at the school, covers up her intelligence to win over Troy.
In this book online (you'll have to log into your school account to see it, sorry), the author compares girls in mixed gender classes compared to all female classes. It states that women in womens colleges have "greater self esteem at graduation, have less gender-stereotypic career aspirations, are more engaged in college activities, and are more likely to enter traditionally male professions." This doesn't surprise me. In an atmosphere where girls do not feel the need to dumb down they could reach their full potential at school. This book suggests that boys are the cause of girls dumbing down and I also believe that to be the cause. Teenage girls are usually very self conscious in general so it makes sense that they would hold themselves back seeing that many girls might feel that if they show how smart they are, a guy won't like them. This article quotes a book saying, "Girls in grades six and seven rate being popular and well-liked as more important than being perceived as competent or independent." (Bailey). If this is true, which I believe it is, then girls are dumbing down thinking that guys will like them, so that they can then be "popular and well-liked". Its sad that the reason for this is boys, especially when women are making so much progress in today's society.
But maybe I'm wrong. What do you think?
(To all the guys: please don't hesitate to respond. I'd like to know what you think.)
Reference:
Bailey, S. How Schools Shortchange Girls: The AAUW Report. New York, NY: Marlowe & Company.
But maybe I'm wrong. What do you think?
(To all the guys: please don't hesitate to respond. I'd like to know what you think.)
Reference:
Bailey, S. How Schools Shortchange Girls: The AAUW Report. New York, NY: Marlowe & Company.
Sunday, January 9, 2011
CEO
In As this week Mr. O'Connor told us about an award winning magazine piece that was about women in today's society. It was called The End of Men. This very "feminist" article gave many interesting points about how women are essentually excelling in the jobs force much more then men. The author, Hanna Rosin, writes, "According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, women now hold 51.4 percent of managerial and professional jobs—up from 26.1 percent in 1980. They make up 54 percent of all accountants and hold about half of all banking and insurance jobs. About a third of America’s physicians are now women, as are 45 percent of associates in law firms—and both those percentages are rising fast." Another interesting fact, "Men dominate just two of the 15 job categories projected to grow the most over the next decade: janitor and computer engineer. Women have everything else—nursing, home health assistance, child care, food preparation." The statistics that women are climbing the job latter are staggering. I am so glad to be living in a society where men do not take up the large majority of the workforce as they have in decades past. But one thing is still grossly unequal: women in high powered positions.
The End of Men article states that only 3% of CEO's of Fortune 500 companies are women and the number has never risen much above that and how " Prominent female CEOs, past and present, are so rare that they count as minor celebrities". How could this be? If the number of women in the workforce is mostly equal/more than that of men, why are such a small percentage in high powered positions?
Personally I attribute this to the difference in what men and women are willing to give up. What I mean is that I feel like more women do not want to give up having/being with their family. Being a CEO of a major company is a 24 hour job for sure. When it's a painful choice between the client crisis and your child's birthday party, I feel like the employee most likely to put company over family is the traditional, work-oriented male. Now this definitely does not apply for all men. I also feel like more women want the ability to have a career and still have a family and would rather not push to move up in the corporate world if it meant less time with their family.
Marta Cabrera, the former vice president of JP Morgan Chase, was working 12 hour days and one day had the realization that she was missing out on her childrens' lives and quit. She said, "There's a different quality of what men give up versus what women give up" when they attempt to reconcile the demands of a senior job with those of family responsibilities.
But who knows? Maybe women have just not climbed the CEO latter yet.
The End of Men article states that only 3% of CEO's of Fortune 500 companies are women and the number has never risen much above that and how " Prominent female CEOs, past and present, are so rare that they count as minor celebrities". How could this be? If the number of women in the workforce is mostly equal/more than that of men, why are such a small percentage in high powered positions?
Personally I attribute this to the difference in what men and women are willing to give up. What I mean is that I feel like more women do not want to give up having/being with their family. Being a CEO of a major company is a 24 hour job for sure. When it's a painful choice between the client crisis and your child's birthday party, I feel like the employee most likely to put company over family is the traditional, work-oriented male. Now this definitely does not apply for all men. I also feel like more women want the ability to have a career and still have a family and would rather not push to move up in the corporate world if it meant less time with their family.
Marta Cabrera, the former vice president of JP Morgan Chase, was working 12 hour days and one day had the realization that she was missing out on her childrens' lives and quit. She said, "There's a different quality of what men give up versus what women give up" when they attempt to reconcile the demands of a senior job with those of family responsibilities.
But who knows? Maybe women have just not climbed the CEO latter yet.
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Art Therapy
In AS, when we were watching the movie The Cats of Mirikitani, it was interesting to me that Jimmy Mirikitani, the main character, repeatedly drew pictures of the Tule Lake internment camp where he spent 3.5 years of his life. Why would he want to paint a memory that was so painful for him, over and over and over again?
Later I realized, it was his form of therapy. A few years ago in Wilmette there was a walk called the Kirathon. It was in dedication of Kira Arney, who would be a senior this year, who died of a malignant brain tumor. It raised funds for art therapy at Children's Memorial Hospital. (Read more about it here). Art therapy for cancer patients has been proven to help the quality of life and reduce the pain and anxiety in cancer patients. In this article, a doctor is quoted as saying, "Art therapy provides a distraction that allows patients to focus on something positive instead of their health for a time, and it also gives patients something they can control." Now I don't mean to say that Jimmy Mirikitani is like a cancer patient or vice versa but his art may act in the same way for him as it does to a cancer patients. Drawing the camps also might relieve his pain because he knows that he survived it and that his life has moved on.
Later I realized, it was his form of therapy. A few years ago in Wilmette there was a walk called the Kirathon. It was in dedication of Kira Arney, who would be a senior this year, who died of a malignant brain tumor. It raised funds for art therapy at Children's Memorial Hospital. (Read more about it here). Art therapy for cancer patients has been proven to help the quality of life and reduce the pain and anxiety in cancer patients. In this article, a doctor is quoted as saying, "Art therapy provides a distraction that allows patients to focus on something positive instead of their health for a time, and it also gives patients something they can control." Now I don't mean to say that Jimmy Mirikitani is like a cancer patient or vice versa but his art may act in the same way for him as it does to a cancer patients. Drawing the camps also might relieve his pain because he knows that he survived it and that his life has moved on.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)