Birth Rate Decline

On November 29th, the Pew Research Center published an analysis about the current status of birth rate in the U.S. The results indicate that “The U.S. birth rate dipped in 2011 to the lowest ever recorded” and the statistics show that the main responsible of the change are immigrant women.
The decline in the birth rate is, according to the Pew, explained by the Great Recession, in which Latino population affirm that they were affected by the economic breakdown harder than other groups. Even when a first glance this could be considered a purely racial problem, a concept that could look contradictory; the Melting Pot also plays a big role in the situation.
The birth rate decline is a phenomenon that affects the American-born population since the Great Depression. However, immigrants, especially those who came from Mexico have not been part of the same dynamic until now when their birth rate has fallen by 23%. If the Melting Pot ideology implies the assimilation of new cultural patterns, a different perspective from the racial one could explain the demographic change as part of this process of assimilation, especially considering the economic circumstances that led to the decline are as similar as they are.

Source

The Modern Self-Made man

I recently saw a video about a 15 year old living in Sierra Leone who taught himself a lot about electronics just by finding old pieces of technology, studying them, and building with them.  He was recently recognized and became the youngest person to ever be invited to the "Visiting Practitioner's program" at MIT.  This got me  thinking about the concept of the self-made man put into a modern American context.  It seems to me that with recent increases in technology available to most Americans, why do more people not use this technology to their advantage and instead choose to live how they're expected to.  Just about anyone in America with access to the internet could use it to learn just about anything they want and really build themselves from the ground based on any interest they may have.  Although this obviously does happen sometimes, I'm curious as to why it isn't more common for the modern American to take initiative and pursue whatever goals they may using these newly created resource like the internet.  Does the self-made man not apply so much in a modern context or have modern Americans just lost their drive to really make something of themselves?

[Sorry for the late post]

What's your favorite color?

It is entering the holiday season, which of course means watching Buddy the Elf roam around New York City. I use this example because I am a huge Will Ferrel fan, but many christmas movies, It's a Wonderful Life for example, preach the same message. Throughout the movie Buddy the Elf teaches his estranged father about what christmas really means, and that family and friends are more important than money and success. Individuals like Buddy's father are evidence of the hegemony that surrounds our American economy.
We are taught that money is extraordinarily influential, and is the key ingredient to getting anything you need in life. So without question so many people will work their lives away trying to simply accumulate wealth. It seems so logical in our society that if only we had more money, we would be happier with our new lives. We forget the other aspects of happiness and success in our lives, or in the case of the novel we read, Ralph's desire for wealth simply takes a greater toll on his financial integrity.
The American ideal is simply that money is the most important thing in the country, and literally makes the world go round. It is good people like Buddy the Elf that stand up to question the hegemony that only he has noticed, because it is so ingrained in our society.
So on that note, Happy Holidays!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elf_(film)

The Commercialized American Dream

 

I've learned from other class on Monday about the pepper-spray event happened in November last year. The students of UC Davis lunched a protest to against increasing tuition and the privatization of public university but were brutally encumbered by campus police officers. The video still full of shock today because it reminds us of the reality of American public university now.

 

Here is another article written by William Durden, the president of Dickinson College. He wrote to response the still prevailing notion of "an English upper class liberal education that was literally defined as being only for those with sufficient wealth to do nothing professionally but dabble in learning."

 

A Useful Liberal Arts

http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2012/11/26/essay-idea-useful-liberal-arts

 

Those two materials combined generate my thinking of the relationship between education and the American Dream. The privatization of public university is turning education into a commodity to make profit as well as deal with financial crisis. Under this situation, education is no longer for public good but transformed into private asset used for personal needs. Let's go back to the fundamental purpose of education. Why people go to school? I believe most of us would say: to gain knowledge, have a good job and become a successful person in the future. As for me, education is an essential part of American Dream and public school played the same essential role to promote this dream, that is to fulfill equality of education so that everyone has equal opportunity to succeed.

 

The call for people to realize the usefulness of liberal arts also reflects people's more and more narrowed concept of success. Why compared to biology, chemistry, physics and economics, liberal arts value less in modern society? Why money should be allocated more for science research instead of arts? Living in the era more and more relying on technology, people's way of thinking this world has been mechanized. The pragmatic education and profit-oriented society deprived of people's spiritual development. Therefore, when confronting crisis, they give up the original believes of establishing this country and start to construct a new American Dream to cover the real rapacious purpose.

 

Th recent legalization of marajuana

http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/08/opinion/roffman-pot-legalization/index.html?iref=obnetwork
The results of the recent election indicate that marijuana is now legal in two more states.  The interesting thing about this video clip is the fact that they mention incarcerated black males, when they bring up the negative aspects of marijuana. It is clear that they are racializing drug users. Another interesting point is the fact that they ignore those who use marajuana for medical purposes.  They criticize it in its entirety, when it can actually alleviate certain medical problems, such as severe back pain.  They ignore the fact that marijuana may have been legalized for state taxation purposes thus stimulating the economy. Marijuana legalization may not be as bad of an idea as we perceive it to be.

Personality Disorders

The American Psychiatric Association is considering adopting a new diagnostic system to make the diagnosing of personality orders easier and more accurate. This relates back to Daniel’s lecture about disabilities in America and how they are viewed. The article describes those with such disorders as misfits who are isolated on their own island. It shows how the goal of people who are not affected by such conditions to categorize people who have the disorders in order to find a way to cure them or to make their life better than it is before their diagnosis. The difficulty to distinguish the differences between different disorders was largely discussed, arguing that the current system used to identify the disorders were much too vague and need to be simplified. Thus making it more efficient to place the people into the category in which they belong according to the Association. This directly relates to the labeling of those who are different from the norm so that those doing the labeling can try to understand their differences so they can be better understood and hopefully “fixed”.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/27/health/clearing-the-fog-around-personality-disorders.html?pagewanted=1&ref=general&src=me

Are we losing Traditional America?

Many are depressed because Traditional America seems to be disappearing

Bill O'Reilly speaks about the loss of traditional America. Traditional America is a very loaded statement as he really could be talking about any era of America history. Although within context, he is referring to some era, where the president doesn't support social justice and perhaps even a white president. Interestingly, when you do see his commentary on "A Tale of Two Americas", O'Reilly makes it sound like "many" Americans are disappointed in the direction that the country is heading towards. I doubt that many Americans are deeply disappointed in losing traditional America. America, as history shows, has the ability to change its norms. Who knows what this new term can bring?

Robotic Arms a technological Impact

Robotic arms seems to be a science fiction these days in action movies and sci-fi networks; however, the idea of giving back mobility to those who have lost it sparked the technology into reality. Those who are fortunate to afford and adapt to a new limb got back a sense of control in their life. These technological advances ultimately resolved a need and cultural anxiety to those who are missing body parts. In a way, it also affected the people around them. Families of the handicapped are rejoiced to see their loved ones gain back the confidence and mobility through cuting-edge innovation.

Many of the common behaviors today like driving, texting, surfing the Internet are due to the fact that Americans in the 21st century have made technology an asset to improve their lifestyles. Not only that, but it seems that technology has made Americans a part of who we are. We are around technology all the time giving time and attention to objects we find useful in life.

The effects of Race in Politics

Racism? Black leaders fret white person may take Jesse Jackson's House seat

*Black leaders in Chicago are worried that a white person may take the congressional seat formerly held by Jesse Jackson, Jr., son of civil rights leader Jesse Jackson, Politico reported Tuesday.
The concern is that so many black candidates are competing for the position that a white candidate may step in and take the seat.
"The worries escalated this week after former Rep. Debbie Halvorson, a white Democrat and veteran of suburban Chicago politics, threw her hat into the ring," Alex Isenstadt wrote.
“There’s a great deal of concern that Debbie Halvorson would win because the black vote would be split 18 ways,” Delmarrie Cobb, a longtime Democratic political consultant in Chicago said.
“The battle we have is that we can’t afford to lose a black voice in Congress,” she added. “It would be a terrible loss in many ways,” she added.
According to Politico, losing the seat to a white person, no matter how qualified, would "be a blow to the black establishment."
Halvorson, Politico notes, is no newcomer. She "served two years in the House and spent 15 years in local and state office," but lost her primary bid against Jackson earlier this year. According to Politico, she won majorities in two of the district's three counties, described by Isenstadt as suburban and mostly white.
"Chicago, long a center of black cultural and political power – it’s the home of the nation’s first black president, Barack Obama, and the first black member of Congress, Oscar De Priest - would see its delegation in the Congressional Black Caucus diminish from three seats to two," Isenstadt added.
The district Jackson served since 1995 has a small majority of black voters, Politico said. Jackson resigned from his seat last week, citing mental health issues.
The message is quite clear: White people need not apply, no matter how qualified they may be, or how well they may represent the district. Race is all that matters and nothing else -- except for one's political party.
Had the roles been reversed, with white Republicans expressing concern that a black person may win a seat formerly held by a white person, the entire Democrat-media complex would explode with rage, and Twitter would be flooded with death threats.
But one must remember, this is Chicago, and the seat was held by a black Democrat. Therefore, the rules are different. It's enough to make one wonder who the real racists are these days.*


This article is not subtle at all, but, instead, shows explicit examples of racialization. Rather than being, what is considered to be, the norm of racialization (that of white people racializing blacks), we see the opposite. Here, black people are stating that white people must not take Jesse Jackson's seat in Congress. However, it is not as if they would be taking the seat by force, but would rather be voted in, fairly. This is an example of racialization because white people are being targeted specifically for their skin color and not because of the political views that they may hold. The article even implies that it doesn't matter if the white person is affiliated with the same political party as Jackson, they just do not want a white person in his seat because they feel as if they will lose some of their say in Congress. If people are being voted into the House of Representatives and the Senate merely because of their skin color, what does that say about America's political system?

The Last Five Years

The musical "The Last Five Years" composed by Jason Robert Brown, originally starring Leo Norbert Butz and Sheri Renee Scott, is a story about a couple's five year marriage, doomed from the start. Cathy is a struggling actress and Jamie is a successful author. The couple's roles play into stereotypical female and male gender roles. Their stories are told in opposite directions: Cathy's from end to beginning, and Jamie's from beginning to end. Cathy requires Jamie to keep her on her feet and her life circles entirely around him, "Finally yes! / Finally now! / Finally something takes me away / Finally free / Finally he can cut through this strings / And open my wings!" She cannot gain her own freedom without Jamie's help, mimicking the idea that women require a men to get anywhere in life. The song that goes along with Cathy's is called, "I Could Never Rescue You," sung by Jamie. "I could never rescue you / All you ever wanted / But I could never rescue you / No matter how I tried." Jamie sings about how he could love her and leave her, and not do his "job" by rescuing her.

Cultural Citizenship for Music from Foreign Countries?

This year, a song from Korean Pop that has topped the charts in over 33 countries by PSY, "Gangnam Style" has brought Kpop to the world like never before. However, even before the debut of PSY, many boundaries have been redefined in in the modern American Music. However, may there actually be a sort of "cultural citizenship" that lies within music?
Although from the beginning there was enormous popularity for Korean music (Wonder Girls, Super Junior, Girl's Generation), it was very hard for Korean music groups to successfully do business and be welcome in America because of the hidden hardships existent from something similar to the "colorblind cultural racism" described by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva. One good example is iTunes, a podcatcher/music-selling software so popular in America and yet so exclusive in the music that it allows. Many popular artists from different countries do not even have a single album on this podcatcher. The inclusion of Korean music and other music from different countries has significantly bettered since the beginning of the Century, because of new ways of popularizing music videos and albums through You Tube, Twitter, and other systems via the web. The level of exposure to music from other countries is actually quite limited by what American companies and the American government allow. 

Black Friday

Thanksgiving is a day to be spent with family reminiscing about years past, sharing good food and good company. It is a day where we are supposed to stop and think about what we are appreciative for in our lives, what we would like to express gratitude for. So isn't it interesting that, the very night after we are supposed to acknowledge how thankful we are for all that we have, stores open at 12am with sales and deals that only last till the morning and we rush out of our houses in a consumeristic buying frenzy to purchase things that we want and don't have.

On Black Friday, I saw a tweet that stated: "Black Friday: Because only in America people trample each other for sales exactly one day after being thankful for what they already have." This tweet really struck me, for why would it be accepted and understood that this kind of thing would happen "only in America"? What does this phenomena called Black Friday have that is so "American"?

Black Friday plays into the concept of the American Dream. People have an idea of what the ideal American person is, and many of the time that idea contains material things that demonstrate that, because someone has the latest trends, they have enough money, power, and success to be achieving their version of the American Dream. People want things to tangibly represent their success and their participance in society, and when they have the opportunity to buy things on "sale", they are willing to wait in line at two in the morning to achieve that goal.

Black Friday also plays into Robbins' ideology of the lawn, for just as people think that they are making their own choices about whether or not to participate in Black Friday, or participate in the chore of planting and maintaining a lawn, society is really influencing their decisions and actions.

The irony of Americans going out to buy things the day after they profess their gratitude for what they already have is evident, as is how Black Friday plays into the idea of the American Dream and the ideology of the lawn.

Good Housekeeping

Today I was looking online at various women's magazines and came across Good Housekeeping, a magazine aimed for married women/women with children on how to cook, clean, organize and keep their family afloat. This magazine has been popular since the 1980s and still very prevalent today. The magazine does not include articles about the workplace, being an independent single lady or being a strong individual. I find it funny how only traditional roles of women are being displayed, even in 2012.

Not only did the content stand out to me, but the name itself was a huge red flag. Good Housekeeping supports societal stereotypical women roles: Women must take care of the home while the man is the bread-winner. This is similar to the stereotypes Douglas points out in Where the Girls Are. It's magazines like this that help keep 1950s women roles current in society. I'm not surprised that women/mothers/wives are buying this magazine because society has conditioned women into thinking they have to fit these roles, most of the time.

You can find this magazine and its current articles online HERE

The Urban Frontier

Coyotes may be a familiar sight in rural areas of the rugged west, but on Saturday night they turned up in an unexpected place. Two coyotes were spotted wandering around Chicago's Wrigley Field, a heavily urbanized area far from the large public parks and fringes of rural suburbs where wild animal sightings typically occur.

What were coyotes, large dangerous predators, doing in a busy area of one of the nation's most populous cities? The article suggests that they were searching for food, perhaps lured by a nearby McDonald's. But why would coyotes be forced to scavenge in the city for food, far from their natural habitat? Increasing encounters between wild predators and urban residents (attacks on pets, repeated sightings in increasingly urban areas) suggest that the human conquest of the environment is taking a turn to the wild side.

The human dominion in the American landscape has been complete since the close of the frontier in the 1890s (discounting uninhabited northern Canada), yet we continue to clash with nature. Our extensive national parks system is under threat by environmental degradation, human intervention, and urban encroachment. In the meantime, wild animals are coming closer and closer to human residences in search of food. This is creating a dangerous trend, for humans and animals alike.

Animals are being displaced from ancestral habitats by human population expansion, reducing the available resources and forcing interactions between animals and humans. Humans are vulnerable to disease, attack, and attacks on our domesticated pets. Wild animals are struck by cars, killed by hunters and LEOs, or injured by competition with other animals. This dangerous symbiosis is bad news for both the wild inhabitants of our country and the human population.

The increasing encounters between animals and humans in urban settings are forcing us to reconsider how we define and interact with nature. As we urbanize and continue to expand, we must be considerate of the wildlife we are encroaching upon. As we replace prairies, forests, and natural habitats with farmland, industrial centers, and our expansive "turfgrass" lawns we are altering the ecosystem to which we belong. No longer is there a clear separation between wilderness and city. To animals, cities are the frontier. They will seek to reclaim their territory whether humans like it or not.

Chevy Commercial on Thanksgiving

Over break I had the chance to watch NFL and I noticed a Chevy commercial that repeatedly pushed the fact that they are an American company throughout the 30 second clip. I'm sure that American pride like such appeals to middle age, football watching men. You could argue that this is because it will help American businesses, but at the same time, it plays into American Exceptionalism. Chevy, and American companies alike rely on the idea that the driver feels proud enough in their country to buy a car that "represents" America. I think of men who sit down with friends, a beer and watch football as some of the most proud Americans. Even more so, on Thanksgiving, Chevy can appeal to the proud American viewers.

As a driver of a Honda Civic, it would take more for me to sacrifice the excellent mileage and relatively cheap cost, but supporting America certainly has its appeal.

Designer Babies and Eugenics

We learned in class that eugenics is the practice geared towards improving the genetic composition of a society. Whether that be by increasing reproduction of desirable traits and people or lowering reproduction of undesirable traits and people. What happens when parents have the ability to chose the genetic make up of their children? 

In the article posted below an Oxford professor says that is a "moral obligation" to pick traits that are more desired in society. He describes that through this our future society would be  "a better, more intelligent and less violent society." Although the article focuses on personality traits, it also extends to physical traits such as eye color and hair color. 

If society were to take this path, we would be improving our genetic composition through science and technology, which also connects to  de la Pena's lecture and reading. Furthermore, if this were the path to take, it seems like this would be a service the rich would only be able to afford and utilize, which would also have even more influence to the genetic composition of our society since only the select few who could afford it would be able to utilize it.

http://tinyurl.com/cqtet4n

Close-Minded Captioning

When I was watching The Food Network recently, I happened upon a cooking competition featuring a chef from Syria. While I do not remember his name, I do remember that, although he had only a slight Syrian accent and was perfectly understandable in English, all of his speech was captioned as though he was speaking a foreign language. This happens a lot when people have heavy accents, and it is useful for those of us who do not understand what they are saying; however, this captioning is an example of racialization. By treating people who are speaking an English that is only marginally different than what is accepted by mainstream (read: white) audiences, television executives are marking people with accents as "other" and therefore unAmerican.

Women in House call Rice criticism sexist, racist...

USA Today Article: Women in House call Rice Criticism sexist, racist

As most of us know, on September 11th of this year, the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, and three State Department officials were killed in a targeted rocket attack, resulting from riots over a U.S. film depicting the Prophet Muhammad as a fraud.  Certain Republican congressmen were very critical of U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice's comments following the incident, that she failed to inform the American people that this was believed to be a terrorist attack. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham chose to accuse Rice of being unqualified and untrustworthy for her position even after the CIA Director, the ever trustworthy David Petraeus, confirmed that she had reported all the information she had been given and was able to release publicly. Democratic Congresswomen are on the defense, stating that any time something goes wrong for the Republicans, such as losing a Presidential election, they choose to attack the females and minorities in congress as those are who they view as chief supporters of President Obama. 

This is an interesting case of gender politics as well as racialization. 
"All of the things they have disliked about things that have gone on in the administration, they have never called a male unqualified, not bright, not trustworthy," said Rep. Marcia Fudge, the next chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus. "There is a clear sexism and racism that goes with these comments being made by unfortunately Sen. McCain and others."

I believe that racialization can be seen used by both sides of the argument in certain respects here. Is it possible that these Republican senators simply chose to attack Rice for her statement because they truly believed in a lapse of security intelligence communication, which needs to be fixed? Or is it more likely that they are lashing out at her this late after the incidents on September 11th, because they are threatened by her race and gender? Do her race and gender truly determine whether she supports or opposes the elected leadership? It is clear that females in Congress are still denaturalized as equally powerful voices in politics and are feeling the need to defend themselves against character attacks from the "Old Boys' Club."

Racialization, now for kids!

     You may remember a study from CNN where children were assessed on their racial attitudes.  When shown several different cartoon children and asked which ones were smartest or prettiest, they consistently picked the whiter and lighter skinned drawings.  The children all associated the color of skin, thereby including race, into status where the white children were inherently 'better'.  This is a blatant racialization of status because normally ideas of intelligence and beauty shouldn't prefer one race over another. 
     This also begs the question of how did these children learn to racialize status.  Like Bonilla-Silva demonstrates, this new version of color-blind racism is much more subtle.  Even though very few adults would teach their children this racialization, they obviously still learn it from media portrayal.

Article: http://www.nowpublic.com/culture/cnn-study-americas-kids-are-being-racialized

Conspiracy

I recently re-listened to a song by Gang Starr called "Conspiracy" (link). It suddenly became apparent to me that what the artist was trying to convey was not just contemporary racism, but the color-blind contemporary racism as described by Eduardo Bonilla-Silva in "Racism without Racists."

Color-blind racism was described by Bonilla-Silva as a type of racism that is subtly carried out under the defense that the circumstances influenced the decision, not matters of ethnicity. In "Conspiracy," the artist describes the world black people (specifically those of low-income families) live in and how it is stacked against them. He even mentions examples such as "The SAT is not geared for the lower class"and "every time there's violence shown in the media usually it's a black thing." The song touches on how the educational system, media and general mentality of America is against black people, despite the fact that none of the aforementioned examples are specifically against black people. The artist is trying to point out that the government would like everyone to believe that the reason black people and other minorities get the short end of the stick in general is merely a coincidence. "Conspiracy" gives us some incite into how modern racism manifests today.

Nudity Ban in San Fran

In San Francisco on November 20, 2012, the city Board of Supervisors narrowly approved the heightening of existing laws that ban nudity in some public places. This bill requires that people over pre-school age cover their genitals when in public places like streets and sidewalks, in restaurants, and on public transportation (although this does not apply to permitted-festivals, like Gay Pride parades or the Bay to Breakers; going topless is still perfectly legitimate for anyone at any time). In protest, when the motion passed, several concerned citizens stripped completely while in the courtroom. If signed into law, the ban would begin on February 1 of next year.

My initial reaction to learning this was “Wait, it wasn’t already illegal to be naked in San Francisco?” Having spent probably more than one-hundred days and nights in the city over several years, I have seen naked people on the streets and sidewalks, but never in a restaurant or on BART or MUNI; the vast majority of San Franciscans choose to wear clothes regardless of the absence of a mandate. This has “hegemony” written all over it. In class, we defined hegemony as “the consent-based way that individuals agree to follow the invisible rules within a society.” Additionally, it was cited that “ideologies function by seeming non-ideological,” and that over time people begin to take them for granted. San Francisco has a reputation as a very non-conformist city, but the fact that so few people in the city commence their daily activities without clothes that visitors and residents do not even realize that it is an option is a comment on firstly, how sneaky hegemony can be, and secondly, how ubiquitous it is.

Here are a couple of short articles if you are interested in learning more about San Francisco’s nudity ban:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/21/san-francisco-nudity-ban-_n_2171301.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/21/us/san-francisco-officials-vote-to-ban-public-nudity.html

Moon Phases Have No Link to Behavior

A news article I read called "Moon Phases Have No Link to Behavior" (Link) briefly talked about a study done to test whether the belief that the lunar phase has anything to do with one's mental health or not. The study showed that of all patients at a hospital with mental health problems in a set amount of time, their was not an increase or decrease in mental health during one of the moon's phases (baring rare coincidences).

This article is an example of how hegemony can lead to misguided information. Hegemony is the ideology that something is normal if most of the people around you are doing it.

The idea that the phase of the moon has an effect on one's mental health has no scientific backing, yet some still believe it does. Through a few people's superstitious belief in lunar phase effects, enough people were convinced through hegemony to believe the same thing that this study was needed to dispel this "popular opinion" (article). Even an idea as illogical as this can be spread just by having a high concentration of people who believe it make it seem like the norm to their neighbors.

Shape-ups, nothing but empty promises and broken bones

I'm positive that in some point in your life that you have seen this shoe around somewhere, most likely on t.v in an advertisement. Not surprisingly, skechers got a celebrity to endorse their shoe, and that celebrity was none other than Kim Kardashian. These advertisements are always giving promise that just walking in the shoes will burn away fat, tighten and tone your legs and butt. The was one of the first athletic shoe ads that was aimed primarily on women and the idea that the perfect woman is one that is skinny and athletic, yet has the qualities of a toned butt and legs. It is this image that pop culture has ingrained into our brains that has made this shoe so successful.

The interesting thing about advertisements is that they are usually required to be somewhat true and, more importantly, are "shown" to be true through the media. As a result, it is accepted that these shoes truly work miracles and will make the average woman into the perfect woman. The Shape-ups were one of those shoes that was exploited heavily through the media, but its results are actually not proven at all. According to this article (http://articles.cnn.com/2012-05-16/us/us_ftc-skechers-fine_1_shape-ups-toning-shoes-skechers?_s=PM:US) the promises of losing weight and toning your muscles were all deceptive and none of it true. But how could this be? Didn't they have chiropractor Dr. Steven Gautreau endorsing the shoe? Yes, they did, but it probably should have been mentioned that he is married to a Skechers marketing executive and was compensated for his endorsement. 

This whole thing just goes to show what de La Pena stated in "The Body Electric" about how we are willing to put our bodies at risk for the chance that technologies will help improve us. This obsession we have is not healthy, and in this case it really had physical consequences. As was stated in this article (http://product-liability.lawyers.com/blogs/archives/22155-Risk-of-Stress-Fractures-from-Skechers-Shape-Ups.html) the Shape-ups actually can cause stress fractures, which is a small crack in your bone that is usually undetectable to any type of camera except for a bone scan. It does this by changing the gait which causes stress to be redirected to bones that are not supposed to take the stress that is now put on them, causing the stress fracture.

This shows that the combination of pop culture and our obsession over technology, and the belief that it will make us better, are not a good combination.

Dozens of People Live as 'John Doe'

http://news.yahoo.com/dozens-people-live-john-doe-193319683--abc-news-topstories.html

This article was really interesting because it discussed cases where people have absolutely no identity. They don't know their own names, age, where they were born or anything about their lives. Because of this they are unable to get jobs, health insurance, or have a place to live. In a sense they are invisible to the world. This made me think back to our discussion of citizenship and having a sense of belonging. In the case of these people, are they even cultural citizens?  They can't function as the rest of us and they don't have any of the same rights because they don't have an identity so they technically aren't citizens of the US if they can't use the resources offered to citizens. They are in this weird world of limbo.   

Dr. Pepper, Men Only?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3iuG1OpnHP8

  Dr. Pepper came out with a diet soda strictly for men, with its slogan as, "It's Not For Women." Dr. Pepper came out with this commercial of a "rugged"  man (almost comparable to the Marlboro Man) shooting people and running away from bad guys in the jungle. I feel that this commercial is putting a major emphasis on the classic view of men and how in order to be really manly you should drink a soda that's only for men. In addition it stereotypes women when the main actor in the commercial says, "you can keep the romantic comedies and lady drinks." By separating the two genders, this commercial feeds to the idea of the role of gender in society, and how men and women should act and look like.

McDonald's Dominates

 

The McDonald’s Corporation, the world’s largest chain of hamburger fast food restaurants, has dominated the fast food industry for years through creating a sense freedom to its customers. They have done so through creating a warming and welcoming environment to people of all classes. The “Golden Arches” are depicted as an American cultural object of great empowerment compared to other fast food restaurants. This cultural object can be linked to American Exceptionalism, the idea that America is the greatest most sophisticated country that has ever been established. Through this concept of American Exceptionalism, one can compare that McDonald's much like America has the abilities and powers in the world to do as they please without worry or consequence. McDonald's stresses on seeking the next best thing to make sure they are on top of their competition in order to achieve greatness, very much like the minds of Americans.   

Key & Peele Skit - Racialization of Names

WATCH FIRST: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gODZzSOelss

I am an avid viewer of the Comedy Central show Key and Peele and they recently aired a skit in which they were pretending to be college football players in an East vs. West showdown. What makes this skit hilarious is the names to that the two actors use during this skit. The two actors, Key and Peele, are both black and they pretend to be the different players that are competing in the football game. They use names like: Tyroil Smoochie-Wallace, D’Squarius Green Jr., Jackmerius Tacktheritrix, D’Isiah T. Billings-Clyde, Javaris Jamar Javarison-Lamar. You get the idea. This relates to our course concept of racialization, which is the process by which an object or idea becomes racialized through association with a particular racial group. Names are not racial entities by themselves, however the person to which the name is assigned gives the name racial meaning. By using names like D’Squarius, Jackmerius, and D’Isiah, Key and Peele have created an association between those names and members of the black community. What highlights this racialization is the fact that the last player introduced in the clip, a white male, is named Dan Smith. This contrast between Dan Smith and the names of the rest of the players highlights the difference between “Black names” and “White names”.  

The Game of Life and the American Dream

The Game of Life is a board game marketed towards kids and their families. The object of the game is to move your way through major life events while making the most money of all the other players. This game reflects the idea of the American Dream, which refers to the prosperity and good fortune that America is stereotypically known for providing for its citizens. There are many versions of the American Dream, but the most prevalent is that of a house, a car, a husband and wife, some kids, and a good paying job that not only allows the family to live comfortably, but also to pay for the so-called "finer" things in life. The Game of Life focuses on this image as the ideal in which achieving these things will help the player win the game because of the high monetary value awarded to each life event. Since this game is marketed toward kids and their families, it is attempting to enforce the hegemonic ideal of the American Dream in people at a young age and push them toward achieving this image.

Aimee Mullins on Disabiltiies

http://www.ted.com/talks/aimee_mullins_the_opportunity_of_adversity.html?quote=648 


  In This TED talk Aimee Mullins, an amputee herself, explains how the disabled are labeled as not being whole.  She refers to an entry in a dictionary on the word "disabled" which lists crippled, helpless, useless, weakened, maimed, wrecked etc.  Mullins states that these descriptions listed in the dictionary make people believe in them once they are given the label.  Although they are just words, they can be very discouraging to those that are disabled.
          The arbitrary labeling of the disabled relates to Caeton's lecture, and the medical model of disability.  The medical model states that people live their lives according to the diagnosis they are given.  Doctors are supposed to determine the future quality of life for the disabled.  However, in this TED talk Mullins argues that people do not have to live by the medical model. Mullins believes that people are in control of their own lives not matter what label they are given.  Mullins says, "there is an important difference and distinction between the objective medical fact of my being an amputee, and the subjective societal opinion of whether or not I am disabled."
           Mullins argues that although it is definitely true she is an amputee, labels of her being "not whole" or "useless" are just meaningless opinions of society.  She can still achieve a fulfilling life even though she is disabled.  She cannot let labels bother her.  It is up to her and her willpower to determine how she is going to live her life.

Calvin and Hobbes Exceptionalist

I came across this comic strip of Calvin and Hobbes when randomly surfing the internet and found that it is a perfect metaphor of American Exceptionalism because Calvin, a typical boy in a typical American family, believes that he and his "snow fort [are] invincible."Only when his tiger friend, Hobbes, smacks a snowball in his face does he realize that there is a lot of air behind his words. This is quite a blunt awakening for Calvin.

American Exceptionalism, or the idea that America and its culture is better than other nations and their cultures, is summed up in this short comic because for a long time America has believed that it is a place like none else (symbolized by Calvin's long rant on how awesome his fort is) and has recently been coming to the new conclusion that it is not as awesome as it is thought to be (symbolized by Hobbes's snowball). America too, is coming to the same blunt conclusion that Calvin came too.

Teens on Steroids

I recently read a quick news bit from the Los Angeles Times entitled, "Teens want more muscle, some use steroids to get there." (http://www.latimes.com/health/boostershots/la-heb-teens-want-more-muscle-some-use-steroids-to-get-there-20121119,0,1539435.story)  It is mostly an expository piece, explaining how young teens have recently begun using steroids. The article alludes to the possibility that the children were "influenced by the media" to build up their bodies.

I feel that articles like this, in spite of their aggressive stance, are invisible next to the influence of popular culture. Television shows continuously depict "cut men" and "toned women", and despite the obvious fictional nature of the portrayals, young minds are highly impressionable. The first thing I thought of was: when electric belts were in vogue, how many children and young adults bought into the fad? It differs in that modern bodies are very visibly augmented, using documented science, where in the early twentieth century, assumptions were made about electricity and justified using thin evidence. But in any sense, emerging technology continues to revolve around shaping human bodies. Regardless of the warnings we see, Americans are overly concerned about body image, and with many thanks to the media.

Heroes? Comics Role in Racism and American Exceptionalism

This picture depicting common heroes in Marvel and DC comics portrays strong color-blind racism and the idea of American Exceptionalism. These comic book characters have been around for years helping save cities while being role models in the community. Kids look up to, adore, and try to emulate these very heroes. However, most every hero shown here is white. There is a clear absence of black and other minority  heroes/heroines. Even in a fictional universe, minorities are ignored in roles of power and importance.  Though this is obvious if you happened to watch a superhero movie over the past few years, it is mostly ignored due to the fact that people assume that white heroes are a part of a natural order of things. 

Furthermore, these comics and heroes represent American Exceptionalism. They uphold the Constitution in their actions and what statements they make. They fight crime and don't violate peoples' rights. This illustrates how America's principles are thought to be the best and therefore preserved at all costs. The ideas that founded the nation are so supreme that heroes fight to protect and abide theses principles. 

Playoff football game or Hurricane Sandy relief? They choose the latter.

http://xfinity.comcast.net/video/denver-students-lift-spirits-in-new-jersey/9175107920

After watching the video, “Trouble the Water,” in class last week, my heart hurt for the people that have gone through such horrible natural disasters.  Yet what saddens me even more is how the government can fail to act out right away and yet, average ordinary people from across the US are more than willing to step up, hold fundraisers, raise money and try to do what they can in order to help others. 

That’s what takes place in this video.  A group of teenagers from Valor Christian School in Denver, Colorado, ditched their high school football playoff game to go to East Coast in order to help victims of hurricane Sandy. 

This to me can relate to the American Dream and how an ideal united citizenship could look.  The typical American Dream is that people work hard for their money, have a family, support their family, and live in a nice house.  Yet for the people in these natural disasters, this becomes impossible.  They lose their homes and trying to renovate after such an event, can cost a lot of money that most families don’t have.  This can cause great stress to the family and the economy because people are lacking a place to live and for those government agencies that help, it may raise the country’s tax dollars. 

Yet, when you see people who are willing to give up their time, their extracurricular activities and their hard-earned money to travel across the country, it really shows that there are citizens in this country that care for other citizens and want to sacrifice a little of their own in order that someone may gain a little. 

A Sad Day in American History- The End of Twinkies

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/judge-asks-hostess-mediate-union-203749038.html


     As you all have recently heard, the Hostess company has filed for bankruptcy and demand for Hostess products such as Ding Dongs, Ho-Hos and the legendary Twinkie has skyrocketed within the last week. The Hostess brand, but more importantly, the Twinkie itself, is an American icon that embodies the the New Frontier. The mascot, Twinkie the Kid is portrayed as a rugged "frontiers kid "that is ready to take on the new world with his soft spongy cake exterior and sweet creamy filling. Just like America and its ambition of manifest destiny and spreading from East to West. Also like the Marlboro Man embodying the essential ruggedness of a frontiersman, Twinkie the kid embodies the playful youth of a frontiers child, and the innocence of the growing America. The death of the hostess brand not only marks the end of a creamed filled snacks that laid the foundation for our childhood, but more importantly the image of the New Frontier to children.

The Name's Gordon, Sam Gordon

Sam Gordon's show is only beginning, but the football part might end surprisingly soon

There's the life of a Super Bowl MVP, and then there's the life of Sam Gordon.

In the two weeks since her football highlight video hit the blogosphere, then the mainstream media, the nine-year-old sensation has appeared on Good Morning America, taken in a BYU game, flown to Chicago for a daytime talk show, tackled Marshall Faulk on the set of the NFL Network, and on Sunday afternoon she huddled up with the 49ers at practice.
Sam Gordon, 9, has become an overnight sensation. (Courtesy of Brent Gordon)Monday she'll meet Steve Young and watch Monday Night Football. And in a couple weeks, "Sweet Feet" is hoping to catch a Giants game in New York and meet NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, who phoned her dad this week to congratulate him.
Oh, and she's also been invited to do some public speaking. At age 9.
So what's been the best part of being arguably the youngest ever NFL celebrity?
Actually, it's the part that has nothing to do with the gridiron. That's because Sam Gordon's biggest dream hints at the end of her football career.
Sam's dad, Brent, is still in a happy state of shock about what happened when he uploaded video of his daughter tackling, juking and darting past older boys in her Salt Lake City Gremlins football league. He's been flooded with hundreds of calls, so many that he had to turn off his cell phone for a few days so he could, you know, be a father to not only Sam, but 12-year-old Max, who inspired his little sister to pick up football in the first place.
"I just can't believe some of this stuff," he said by phone Sunday, allowing a laugh.
Brandon Marshall mentioned Sam in a tweet. LaMichael James nominated her for the Heisman. (Don't tell Kenjon Barner.) Staffers at the Salt Lake City airport not only recognized Sam, but asked her to sign their Wall of Fame. When she got to her Chicago hotel for the TV taping – Brent says he's been sworn not to tell which show – the concierge had milk and cookies sent up to Sam's room.
But the biggest treat, at least for Sam, came in the form of a shout-out from a non-football player. U.S. soccer star Abby Wambach tweeted that she'd like to invite Sam to a game.
There was one problem, however: Brent didn't know how to respond. He didn't have a Twitter account, had no idea how to contact Wambach. So he set up a Twitter handle for Sam (@FootballSam6) and replied. (Sam's very first tweet, on Nov. 8: "Hi Abby!")
And on Nov. 30, the Gordons will fly to Phoenix and Sam will kick the ball around with Wambach and the U.S. National Team. Then they'll stay an extra day for a match on Dec. 1.
Some might wonder why she would consider something other than football, but Sam's career plans lie on the pitch. As many parents know, the two sports often conflict, so a choice has to be made.
"She'll play football for the next two years," Brent said Sunday. "Then she'll want to focus on soccer."
Sam's having a blast meeting NFL celebs from Warren Sapp to Jim Harbaugh, but her heart has always been with soccer. And it's hard not to see her succeeding there, considering her moves and speed. She loves being called "Mini Mia" after a certain soccer superstar, and she certainly looks the part as she takes aim at this unfortunate goaltender. Considering she told the NFL Network Sunday she likes defense more than offense because she can plow into people, the only possible drawback is that she can't tackle in soccer. Her plan is to play, at most, just two more seasons of football, and Brent's fine with that. He's just happy all this happened during a three-week break from school so his daughter had time to get her teeth pulled when she wasn't doing TV interviews.
There have been a couple of difficult moments for Brent, most notably when he had to swap out the music on his famous video because of copyright laws. But mostly it's been a joy ride. He says he's not out to make any money off this; he just wants Sam to have fun.
"When people call me," Brent says, "most of them say, 'I have a daughter that plays sports.' They see Sam getting attention, and they relate. They are just proud fathers. When Roger Goodell called me, we didn't talk football; we just talked about our kids for 10 minutes."
You can see the appeal to everyone from Goodell to Mia Hamm to Desmond Howard, who also suggested Sam should win the Heisman. Football may be the one sport where, in time, a woman's physique becomes a disadvantage. But it seems the whole country is celebrating a girl who not only has the guts to get on the field, but has the talent (and tackling skill) to dust the boys.
For the next few weeks, while she's in the spotlight, and for the next couple of years while she's on the football field, Sam will be playing for a lot of little girls across the country. And she'll be living, smiling, sprinting proof of something moms and dads always tell their sports-loving little girls: You can beat the boys.

Sam Gordon is a nine-year old girl who has become a national sensation for football fans everywhere. Other then her small stature and age, what makes her unique (or rather stand out) is that she can play on par with boys her age; or more specifically she can hold her own in a football game and can even tackle boys down. She serves as an icon that in football men and women can play equally, further reinforcing America's image of equality. In the past American Exceptionalism, the belief that America was ordained by God to be here and was unique, support a manly and white image. As observed in the article "Where the Girls are", both America and the media have attempted to downplay women so that men remained in power. Recently the trend of America, or so I like to believe, has favored equality; therefore the image of a woman (or rather a girl) being able to play football on equal footing as men/boys has become popular amongst American (which may explain why Sam Gordon has become a national sensation within such a short time frame). It was stated that while the media can become a woman's worst enemy, it can also serve as the best of allies. And in this case the media has sided with women and equality ending with the following imparting message: "{Girls} can beat the boys."

Consumer Culture

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WS-NtVKwDk

This commercial, which is part of the 'Larry's Wild American Flavor Sweepstakes' that Prilosec OCT has launched, promotes Larry's tour of America in search of 'all the genius wild flavors that this country has to offer'. The commercial plays on the contemporary American ideologies that highly value consumption. Larry the Cable Guy, a figure representing the common, blue collar, 'American' man, exclaims "This is America! We don't just make things you want; we make things you didn't even know you wanted!" This statement reflect American consumerism and the desire to obtain things, even if they are things we don't need. This can be tied to the Douglas reading, when she describes the affects the mass media has on consumer decisions.

Genderization of Women Voters

In this clip from The Daily Show, Jon Stewart reflects on the mass media's perception of the women voter.  At one point, the media claims that "single women vote democratic because they don't care about the future of America, and only are concerned about abortion."

In relation to the class, this statement can be seen as a genderization, or when gender based distinctions are made within a group.  Since the media is referring to all single women only voting for Barack Obama based on their views of abortion, they have essentially clumped all single women into one category based on their claim.  Although this is not true, all single women are seen to only care about the one issue, and therefore their votes are unfair in the election.

In the Baynton reading, a similar issue is discussed.  At one point, he states that people believed "women's flaws made them incapable of exercising equal political and social rights with men."  Just like the statement discussed on The Daily Show, women are seen to be incapable of voting for the good of America.  Instead, they are physically incapable of voting for the good of the country, and just vote to benefit themselves.  This flaw (as Baynton would call it) is what the current media believes is holding America back, and has led to the election of Obama for a second term.

Here is the video clip discussed if anyone is interested in watching it:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/425435

The Final Frontier

So while looking at my Facebook news feed, I came across a fan-made advertisement for NASA's Facebook page. The video is less than a minute and shows some shots of the space program to triumphant trumpet sounds. The video is less than a minute long.

http://www.wimp.com/nasaadvertisement/

The joke of the Facebook post was to illustrate the lack of effort NASA puts into public awareness when, as the video shows, NASA could put together a very attention-grabbing advertisement. This got me thinking that not only does the American public care much about the space program anymore, the federal government has made many large budget cuts to the program.

The concept of the American Frontier, popularized by Frederick Jackson Turner, was that America should expand its borders for the sake of democracy and for economic expansion. Geographically speaking, space is the last extension of the Frontier to be explored. What we have seen in recent years is a disinterest in supporting this Frontier expansion by both the American government and its citizens. Money that would have gone to NASA now goes to other other government funds to better the lives of those living in America. These observations lead me to believe America has reached an equilibrium with the rest of the world as far as land is concerned. Influence is something completely different, but we are no longer claiming ownership of land already occupied.

Obama Racialized

New Book Proves President Obama Not a Natural-Born US Citizen 

San Carlos, CA (PRWEB) October 01, 2012 

Just in time for the 2012 presidential elections, author Bob Gard has released an eBook that sheds light on a controversy that, over the last few years, has become a grim contest of political wills. The book offers a historically verified definition of the term "natural born citizen" as it appears in the presidential eligibility clause in Section 1 of Article II of the Constitution.

With the ponderous but eminently searchable title of "On Gard, Obama, You Are An Unconstitutional President Because You Are Not A Natural-Born Citizen, Which I Shall Prove Beyond A Reasonable Doubt," this 1,722-page volume lays out conclusive, verbatim evidence that the reader can analyze independently of the writer's own opinions. Available at Amazon.com, the eBook can be downloaded on PCs in the Microsoft Word™ 2010 “docx” file format. The 175-megabyte file requires a longer-than-average downloading time, and some readers may experience intermittent warnings of “not responding.” Author Bob Gard says, "The wait will be worth it for those who wish to follow a path back to constitutionality."

Bob Gard is the first person who pieces together this comprehensive definition of natural-born citizenship using both correlative and corroborative evidence. For more than 220 years, much of this evidence has been readily available within the public domain, but no one has yet brought the parts together into a conclusive whole. In order to define natural-born citizenship, this book traces how the law of nature, the law of nations, the British legal system and the American legal system have evolved through the course of history. "The evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Barack Hussein Obama's claim to presidential office is unconstitutional due to his violation of the Constitution’s presidential eligibility clause," Gard says.

The pieces of this puzzle are drawn from five centuries of books and documents that cost the author over $30,000 to acquire, as well as citations from a myriad of archives in libraries around the world. This book's size results from numerous extended quotations and images that establish the provenance of the documents in question. Compelled by an imperative desire for readers to draw their own conclusions, the author has risked alienating many who would be put off by such a lengthy work. "In a time where revisionist spin doctors truncate documents, cite quotes out of context, and simply rewrite history as they see fit, I wanted to remain as true to the research as possible," Gard says. "Those who read this book will rapidly understand the necessity of including so many links in the chain of evidence."

According to the book, the true and historically valid definition of the term "natural born citizen" disqualifies President Obama from running for reelection in the upcoming presidential elections.

-Bob Gard

There have been quite few people that have brought up an argument by stating that President Obama is not actually a natural born citizen, even though his documentation proves otherwise. These individuals, who are almost entirely members of the republican party, are making claims about Obama's nationality because of his full name, Barack Hussein Obama, and because of his skin color. One can be certain that these claims wouldn't be thrown around if Obama had been a white man running for office. Many people that voted against Obama claimed to not know much about his policies, but instead decided to vote against him because of his skin color and this idea that "he is unconstitutional president." This idea of racialization can be connected to Bonilla-Silva's text.

White People Racialized

This post is about two things: one, that you are awesome, and two, that white people can be racialized, too.

First, you're awesome! These are GREAT comments on really great posts. I'm really impressed and keep it up! (Bonus points for bonus posting beyond your homework assignment, but not if it's "I agree!" because I get an email about all of these, all right?)

Second, white people are racialized too! It's less likely to be detrimental (and more likely to be a privilege, like presuming a white teenager in a corner store isn't going to steal but a teenager of color is), and sometimes it's a racialization for the funnies. Por ejemplo, whitepeoplemourningromney.blogspot.com has a litany of images like this one:

about how sad white people are that Romney lost. 

This tumblr shows the racialization of white voters - that they voted for Romney, and that they are sad about Obama winning. My experience might tell me that lots of white people voted for Obama, and lots of people of color voted for Romney, but the dominant ideology functions to tell me that white people voted for Romney and are sad, and does so through race.