Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Free Press Reaction
I found the responses to Patrick Leahy letter very surprising coming from what I assume are members of or near the Burlington area. I assumed they would all be for hate crime legislation and have very liberal views on this situation. To my surprise, this wasn't the case. They were actually all views that I feel the same way about. As a country we have been fighting for equality in all aspects one can think of. Putting certain groups into a new law that protects them isn't creating equality it is separating them from the rest of the public. I personally don't agree with hate crime laws. "Hate" isn't illegal, and if it ever becomes illegal I think people will have to start rethinking about their surroundings. I personally feel that yes no one likes to be hated in any situation, but people need to become adults and stop pointing the finger at someone because they said something that offended them. Its part of life, its part of our rights, thats why we do it. As the gay conservative person says in the reading its only going to make people more pissed off and hate even more people. Hate crime laws seem to protect blacks and homosexuals, I dont see anything in there about protecting white people. If someone punches me and they were black and I try to say that it was a hate crime, people would laugh at me because for some reason I feel people don't think you are able to illegally hate a white person. You can obviously see my opinion on this situation and how I feel that it is unnecessary to increase a jail sentence because someone hated someone else. I guess what I'm trying to get at is we should give up on the idea of equality because its never going to happen, someone or group will always be treated better then the other. Thats just the way of life.
Sunday, November 4, 2007
Reflection ch. 9
"Each year, more and more major corporations grant financial benefits to unmarried, same-sex domestic partners".
If I'm understanding this quote correctly its saying that big corporations are giving bigger and better financial benefits for people that are gay and not giving the same benefits for straight people. For some reason this seems to fall off of the equality for everybody issues that seem to always be coming up in homosexual vs. heterosexual arguments. I guess I just dont understand how people can fight to be equal with everyone, but then expect to have different support in other areas. It seems that this issue happens in civil rights, racial rights, anything that people say isnt the norm. Newman writes that corporations do this because it seems to increase workers satisfaction and motivates them to do better work. I'm sorry but if I worked for a company that gave more money to someone because they were gay I dont think it would make me more motivated, it would probably make me more pissed off and have a worse work ethic. For years upon years Americans have been fighting for equality in every aspect you could think of. People either need to give up on the fact that were not all equal, or actually make things equal so people cant bitch about stupid things anymore.
If I'm understanding this quote correctly its saying that big corporations are giving bigger and better financial benefits for people that are gay and not giving the same benefits for straight people. For some reason this seems to fall off of the equality for everybody issues that seem to always be coming up in homosexual vs. heterosexual arguments. I guess I just dont understand how people can fight to be equal with everyone, but then expect to have different support in other areas. It seems that this issue happens in civil rights, racial rights, anything that people say isnt the norm. Newman writes that corporations do this because it seems to increase workers satisfaction and motivates them to do better work. I'm sorry but if I worked for a company that gave more money to someone because they were gay I dont think it would make me more motivated, it would probably make me more pissed off and have a worse work ethic. For years upon years Americans have been fighting for equality in every aspect you could think of. People either need to give up on the fact that were not all equal, or actually make things equal so people cant bitch about stupid things anymore.
Reflection ch. 8
"In the interests of reducing the welfare rolls, the government enacted massive reforms in 1996. As a result, financial assistance to the poor is no longer a federal entitlement".
With welfare no longer being on the shoulders of the federal government it has put all the weight on the state government. Eligibility for welfare is now only good for two years of receiving benefits, with a five year lifetime limit. The reasoning behind this is to have mandatory work requirements for adults, so they can teach their children to have a good work ethic. When I think of people on welfare the first thing the comes to mind is lazy people that have no incentive to go out and get a job to pay for the things they need to survive in life. Although this may sound harsh and narrow minded this is what I have witnessed growing up in a town with people that are on the welfare system. I completely understand that some people just cant have a job for a certain period of time, however when that period of time starts to grow to over five years I think they are just taking advantage of the system. With people that use the system like it is their job its what puts the bad name on welfare, and is the reason why people assume they are just lazy.
Growing up for the first half of my life my mother was single and shortly fell into the single mother problem of juggling too many things at one time. We were on welfare for almost a year but my mother wouldnt just accept that she needed its services, and was ashamed that she had to use food stamps every week. She did just what the book stated, and what the government wanted to happen with the new welfare plan. She showed me a good work ethic and to never give up on life because it will get better. After we were off welfare life only got better, and still gets better every day. Although I can sit here today and say that a lot of people on welfare are using the system, I can say that there are a few people that use it properly to get them back on their feet.
With welfare no longer being on the shoulders of the federal government it has put all the weight on the state government. Eligibility for welfare is now only good for two years of receiving benefits, with a five year lifetime limit. The reasoning behind this is to have mandatory work requirements for adults, so they can teach their children to have a good work ethic. When I think of people on welfare the first thing the comes to mind is lazy people that have no incentive to go out and get a job to pay for the things they need to survive in life. Although this may sound harsh and narrow minded this is what I have witnessed growing up in a town with people that are on the welfare system. I completely understand that some people just cant have a job for a certain period of time, however when that period of time starts to grow to over five years I think they are just taking advantage of the system. With people that use the system like it is their job its what puts the bad name on welfare, and is the reason why people assume they are just lazy.
Growing up for the first half of my life my mother was single and shortly fell into the single mother problem of juggling too many things at one time. We were on welfare for almost a year but my mother wouldnt just accept that she needed its services, and was ashamed that she had to use food stamps every week. She did just what the book stated, and what the government wanted to happen with the new welfare plan. She showed me a good work ethic and to never give up on life because it will get better. After we were off welfare life only got better, and still gets better every day. Although I can sit here today and say that a lot of people on welfare are using the system, I can say that there are a few people that use it properly to get them back on their feet.
Reflection ch. 7
"State and federal legislation usually reflects public opinion, and public opinion on legalizing same-sex marriage is indeed mixed a this point".
When the controversy of same-sex marriage started to become a popular thing across the country it seemed to bring in very different opinions depending on your geological location. Here in Vermont one would think that everyone was pro same-sex marriage because of its liberal overviews however, in my corner of VT it mast mainly against the idea of same-sex marriage. I think we had more "Take back Vermont" signs in my town, and surrounding towns, then actual road signs. This is why I probably don't agree with same-sex marriage. Although I don't agree with same-sex marriage doesn't mean that I'm completly against homosexuality, because that isn't the case. Honestly, I could care less what people decide to do in their own lives, but allowing them to get married seems wrong to me, and against my catholic beliefs. While I was watching the news the other day there was a new poll that actually showed that 53% of VT residents are now opposed to same-sex marriage, a big change over the last few years.
Newman writes, "Even in Vermont, fewer couples than expected have taken advantage of the state law allowing them to register their civil unions". This last quote made me start to think about all the time, effort, and fighting homosexual couples put into trying to get legal marriages, and civil union rights, and now that they have them they don't use them. I guess I don't see the point in fighting for something that your not going to use once you gain access to it. Maybe its because they're scared to start the trend, I'm not really sure. Like I said before, it doesnt really effect me that much one way or the other, so people can choose to do what they want.
When the controversy of same-sex marriage started to become a popular thing across the country it seemed to bring in very different opinions depending on your geological location. Here in Vermont one would think that everyone was pro same-sex marriage because of its liberal overviews however, in my corner of VT it mast mainly against the idea of same-sex marriage. I think we had more "Take back Vermont" signs in my town, and surrounding towns, then actual road signs. This is why I probably don't agree with same-sex marriage. Although I don't agree with same-sex marriage doesn't mean that I'm completly against homosexuality, because that isn't the case. Honestly, I could care less what people decide to do in their own lives, but allowing them to get married seems wrong to me, and against my catholic beliefs. While I was watching the news the other day there was a new poll that actually showed that 53% of VT residents are now opposed to same-sex marriage, a big change over the last few years.
Newman writes, "Even in Vermont, fewer couples than expected have taken advantage of the state law allowing them to register their civil unions". This last quote made me start to think about all the time, effort, and fighting homosexual couples put into trying to get legal marriages, and civil union rights, and now that they have them they don't use them. I guess I don't see the point in fighting for something that your not going to use once you gain access to it. Maybe its because they're scared to start the trend, I'm not really sure. Like I said before, it doesnt really effect me that much one way or the other, so people can choose to do what they want.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Observation # 4
This past weekend I went home to attend a wedding. The groom in the wedding grew up in my hometown and moved to North Carolina a few years ago. While in North Carolina he met a Latino women that is now his wife. They decided to have the wedding back in Canaan because most of his family still lives there, and she didn't have a very large family. The wedding party consisted of her Latino family and two African Americans. I guess to understand where I'm coming from you have to understand what Canaan is like. We have no diversity in my town, and it consists of typical up north stick people so to have people of different ethnicities partying in one of our local bars was a little stressful at times. The reception was at the Northland a local restaurant/bar that usually fills up with locals on a Saturday night, especially when there is a big game on. The DJ that night decided to play mostly Hip Hop because of the wedding party reception. As the night progressed more and more locals were coming into the bar and looking at us dancing and listening to the "unusual" music that was going on. For the most part it didn't bother the people that this was going on because they knew the local family. There was the few older people the go there every Saturday night to two step that quickly left when they heard the music that was playing. What really caught my attention was this group of guys that walked that I haven't seen before. You could tell that they were out hunting that day and came in to have some beer and watch the game. I went to the bar at one point to get a drink and I overheard one of the guys ask the bartender who the "fucking porch monkeys" were, and they should go back to the zoo. I decided to ignore the comment for a few reasons. The first one was I knew it wouldn't make a difference if I tried to explain what was going on since most people up north have there ways set and aren't going to change them. The second one was I used to think the same way as he did. I'll admit when I went home for the wedding I threw around a few racial jokes because up there it really doesn't matter. I knew that they were good people and I had a blast with them that night. I usually shake things off like racial slurs, but since this class started I've started to notice it more in areas that I didn't usually. This fits into our racial profiling part of class because they profiled them as "jigaboos" and didnt take the time to see who they really were.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
Reading Reflection ch. 6
"Although the American distaste for obesity applies to both sexes, it is felt particularly strong by women, who are more likely than men to evaluate their self-worth in terms of their physical appearance" (pg. 201).
In chapter six it discusses the intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Weight, I found the results rather surprising when I read them. My first instinct would have been that there was more obese white women then African American women in the United States. I thought this because of the population difference between African American women and white women in the United States. But in actuality 78 percent of African American women are overweight (a vast majority of them at 120 percent over the recommended weight), and 57 percent of white women are overweight.
One of my thoughts about why the difference between obese women in different races is the pressure differences put onto the different races. When you watch tv, or look in a magazine all the white models are extremely skinny (almost too skinny), so this is what the women strive to look like. All of the women fitness magazines talk about losing weight to where you used to look like in high school. In reality this probably isn't possible for most people. I compare the difference to African American women where they are told to accept themselves as they are. When watching different television shows you always see them saying its okay to be a plus size model, or being a size 6, 7, etc. it isn't a bad thing. One of the leading black models is Tyra Banks, she now has a show on tv that is based mainly for African American women. I was happening to flip through the channels the other day and I came across it, being a guy I stopped to watch because shes rather attractive. In the time span that I was watching she never once told them to lose weight, "just flaunt what your momma gave ya". I think this is probably the main difference between the two different races and the percentage of overweight women.
Newman also goes into talking about dieting in elementary schools. I have an eight year old sister who is in the third grade. I couldn't imagine her being on a diet, or saying she wants to lose weight, unlike 42 percent of 1-3 graders that say they want to lose weight. I feel that most kids are going to be a little pudgy, its part of growing up. They don't need to be on diets to lose weight, maybe a little playing in the back yard instead of watching tv would take care of that problem. Dieting is fine for people that understand what they are doing, and the proper way of going about losing weight. I dont think there are many kids that are in the 1-3 grade that understand of how to properly diet, they will only end up hurting their bodies by doing the wrong thing.
In chapter six it discusses the intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Weight, I found the results rather surprising when I read them. My first instinct would have been that there was more obese white women then African American women in the United States. I thought this because of the population difference between African American women and white women in the United States. But in actuality 78 percent of African American women are overweight (a vast majority of them at 120 percent over the recommended weight), and 57 percent of white women are overweight.
One of my thoughts about why the difference between obese women in different races is the pressure differences put onto the different races. When you watch tv, or look in a magazine all the white models are extremely skinny (almost too skinny), so this is what the women strive to look like. All of the women fitness magazines talk about losing weight to where you used to look like in high school. In reality this probably isn't possible for most people. I compare the difference to African American women where they are told to accept themselves as they are. When watching different television shows you always see them saying its okay to be a plus size model, or being a size 6, 7, etc. it isn't a bad thing. One of the leading black models is Tyra Banks, she now has a show on tv that is based mainly for African American women. I was happening to flip through the channels the other day and I came across it, being a guy I stopped to watch because shes rather attractive. In the time span that I was watching she never once told them to lose weight, "just flaunt what your momma gave ya". I think this is probably the main difference between the two different races and the percentage of overweight women.
Newman also goes into talking about dieting in elementary schools. I have an eight year old sister who is in the third grade. I couldn't imagine her being on a diet, or saying she wants to lose weight, unlike 42 percent of 1-3 graders that say they want to lose weight. I feel that most kids are going to be a little pudgy, its part of growing up. They don't need to be on diets to lose weight, maybe a little playing in the back yard instead of watching tv would take care of that problem. Dieting is fine for people that understand what they are doing, and the proper way of going about losing weight. I dont think there are many kids that are in the 1-3 grade that understand of how to properly diet, they will only end up hurting their bodies by doing the wrong thing.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Observation journal #3
This past weekend I went back home for the long weekend and noticed something that we have been talking a lot about in the past few weeks. While in class we talk about how we don't see any diversity in Burlington and how we need to get more to be a more rounded society. While at home, I really started to notice how everyone is the same in my town. We have virtually zero diversity since the one black person in my town moved away, and we all think alike. Every person on the past weekend seemed to be walking around in their work cloths and was getting ready for the winter ahead, myself included. I'm not one bit saying this is a bad thing that everyone in my town was doing the same thing but this is where my ethnocentric thoughts really started to come into play. While I'm home I automatically go back into my redneck thinking and seem to enjoy myself a lot more. I feel like I can have more fun and be free with what I say and do without having someone down my throat yelling at me or calling me racist, narrow minded, a redneck, etc.. When in classes it seems that ethnocentric thoughts and others like them are looked down upon because if you think like this you aren't seeing the world around you and aren't open to new ideas and ways. Well from observing the way my attitude changed just in the drive back to Burlington I have to disagree with some people and say that ethnocentric thoughts are good. While thinking like this it seems like its the only time I'm happy because I can be myself, an individual, which is what most people want to do. However, you cant do this when you have to worry about what your saying or who you will piss off whenever you open your mouth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)