interdepartmental honors

Well, looks like our topic today is going to be over sexism found in politics. GREAT… Let’s start with what the article I read was all about and how it led to the topic. I was just assigned to read a section from some book. Now, to make things short and sweet, the thing was over how presidential candidates like Sarah Palin, Hilary Clinton, and other female candidates running for other seats in the House were facing sexist comments from the media, men, etc. Ya… you kind of expect that sort of thing would happen, I mean if you look back in history most people in power or held power were men. So, it wasn’t that hard for men to compete with each other to see who could be the alpha dog. However, when a woman is present the whole strategy changes, the woman could be viewed in two ways: one, this must be an insult because someone is pitting a weakling like her against a powerhouse like me; two, she serves as a threat to the long-believed/lived male superiority. Usually, the first view mentioned would be the one expressed frequently, but we all know deep down somewhere the men fear women. Because when that “woman” starts winning some races, there’s a chance that she may win and have all the power. For men, that means chaos and devastation because they still view women as a weaker vessel. Here let me break it down how men usually view women when they try to get some power: weak, emotional, sex-objects, naive, unprepared, etc. Because of those stereotypical views, women continue to be patronized and scrutinized. It’s unfair and ridiculous, women may not be physically strong like men, but they are equal in intelligence and other things. Women are capable of doing things men can do (besides some things like lifting extremely heavy objects and what not,) they aren’t the naive housewives you use to know back in the days. Women are intelligent beings that are capable of solving complex situations and demonstrating leadership when necessary. So, the next time you read in a magazine/newspaper/etc. and see a woman running for office, don’t patronize or underestimate her. Because that woman can prove you wrong and show you that she can  change our lives for the better.

So this week’s reading is about the effects of Internet on human relationships. What’s the big worry about it? Well, apparently there’s been several debates whether the Internet is harming or helping people’s relationships with other people. Some people, James E. Katz and Philip Aspden, believe that the Internet actually helps people form and maintain  relationships with other people. They supported their claim of Internet helping create relationships with research they had done themselves on a group of randomly selected people. They found that majority of Internet users had more friends than non-Internet users and the users also joined more leisure organizations. On the other hand, non-users are more prone to participate in community organizations than users. Which leads us to Robert Kraut, a sociology professor, who believed that the Internet is detrimental to people. He claims that users are isolating themselves from (real) people and that their time spent on the computer/laptop reduces the number and quality of interpersonal relationships they have. For example, the time that users could spend with the family doing recreational activities is replaced by Internet programs/games/etc.

Both of these researchers have good points on the matter, but which one is right? You decide.

Reflection:

Personally, I don’t disagree with any of the researchers, it’s true that the Internet makes it efficient for people to make friends. But, the Internet also damages relationships already made before the Internet. Think about it, when you go online you can meet hundreds of new people everyday and build a relationship with them. It’s easy and you don’t have to meet them face-to-face and you can contact them anytime. However, online you don’t know the “real” person on the other end because online anyone can create the image they want other people to see. Sometimes what the person on the other end isn’t what you would expect and that just sucks. Actually it’s disappointing!

Okay, no more whining let’s continue with the pros and cons of Internet usage. Starting off with the cons, it’s true that the relationship you built with family and friends through face-to-face contact weakens/diminishes. The reason is because you neglect them and spend most of your time talking to your “cyber” friends or doing activities on the Web. But, that doesn’t pertain to everyone, some users find the Internet helpful when contacting faraway relatives for a family get together or planning a rendezvous with a significant other “wink wink.”

——————————————————————————————- Bottom line is think what you like about the Internet, it is what it is.

http://www.isbnlib.com/preview/0375424040/The-Drunkard-s-Walk-How-Randomness-Rules-Our-Lives

This weeks reading is over randomness and pure chance, wow didn’t really expect that but oh well. Usually, people try to figure out how things work and that everything has a solution to it or a reason for it to happen. However, in this book, it talks about how things cannot be explained, especially events that happen out of luck. I got to say, I was actually entertained by this book for a bit. I mean I was reading a couple of pages and one part of the book really caught my attention. It was the part where they were discussing about the flight instructor and his pilots. In that part, the author break down how people think that praising a person for doing good would cause them to do bad the next day while scolding the person or punishing them would cause them to do better. But, what it all comes down to is actually pure luck.

URL: http://moodle.morningside.edu/file.php/2859/Readings/Honors_Readings_March_1.pdf

1st reaction: Okay, so this weeks reading is over various jobs that people acquire in life. To be more accurate the reading is over misjudged jobs, for example, a job as a waitress at the local cafe or restaurant which we usually believe is for the unintelligent people who couldn’t make it in school. Often we think certain jobs pays more or less, such as farming we would think it would be a high paying job considering all those acres of farmland owned by one family. However, it isn’t necessarily true because not all farmers who own lots of land is wealthy, some of them struggle to get decent pay from the food they produce.

According to Pierce Walker, the writer of “Working the Land”, many believe that farmers are loaded which they are not, to them it’s like “gambling” you never know when the weather is going to wipe out your crops or you’re going to have a bad season. Farming isn’t a walk in the park as most people think when they see farmers in tractors tending to their crops, it’s actually grueling work. For a normal man working at an office of some corporation, he has certain hours assigned to work in one day and just maybe a couple of days where he may work over time. But to a farmer, everyday is over time for him, he can’t leave his crops to do something fun such as going out of the country or state for a vacation in Hawaii or something. No, he has to stay with his “babies” and make sure they have enough water/moisture to survive or that they don’t get too much.

Other jobs face similar judgment and restrictions (from recreational activities) such as being a waitress. People tend to look down on waiting jobs because they associate dropouts with restaurant servers, which in reality not all servers are dropouts. Moreover, people usually think those jobs are demeaning. As a waitress, you put up with customer complaints all the time, and face resentment from fellow co-workers because you have more requests for service than they do. It’s a difficult job serving customers, you have to like the job and you have to know how to talk to your customers to make them feel comfortable. For example, if a man in a suit comes in for some coffee you don’t just say, “what would you like” you have to use a hook or attention-getter (as if you were writing some essay) and make them (customers) interested. That way they will enjoy coming to the restaurant more often, you have to use a little bit of psychology to understand what to say to a customer to get them to like you. Going back to the man in the suit, you wouldn’t be talking to him about nail salons or something, you want to be political and start talking about the upcoming elections or something. Now this is where it gets a little hypocritical, I’ve said that people have judged jobs right? Well, people who have those jobs also judge their customers, such as the waitress I’ve been talking for one heck of a long paragraph about. Waiters and waitresses have to be prejudice, they have to judge on the customers appearance to get an idea of how to interact with the customer appropriately. Just in case if I haven’t mentioned this before, or if it isn’t obvious by now… Remember when I said that most people think that servers are unintelligent people? Well, it has just been proved wrong because if those servers can entertain you and have you back requesting for their services then you have just fallen into their trap. You have been ensnared in their meticulously made, complex trap and now you can’t escape because they have played their cards right and won your heart. But, it doesn’t matter does it? Because as long as your happy they are happy (not just because the greens/tips are flowing into their pockets) for they enjoy serving you.

So this week there isn’t going to be a blog because I wasn’t assigned to read anything in particular. I think it’s because I’m going to have a speaker this week, joining my class and sharing his idea or view about a specific event or whatever he so chooses (more than likely math). I’m only saying this because the man is my Stats professor, I don’t think I will be fond of having math as the topic of the group discussion… Because I’m going to be honest. I SUCK AT MATH! Math + Cammy = ? Confusion, Lot’s of questions, and an epic quest to find the right answer. If I could have a choice to go through college without taking any math class or do anything related to math I would. It isn’t because I hate math, it’s just I don’t get it. But oh well, the professor is a cool guy so it might not be THAT bad.

Wow, I never thought I ever live to see the day where I am going to blog about politics and music. This has got to be a dream or I must be hallucinating that my assignment is to read to articles about music with political themes. Oh well, here goes nothing!

The first article I read was ROOTS ‘n’ RAP (here’s the link: http://www.ric.edu/faculty/rpotter/calypso.html) which is, if you haven’t paused to click on the link and read the article, over artists in Trinidad creating music about the government oppression/unfairness. This type of music in Trinidad is called Calypso, which is basically rap with sick beats and rhythm (please YouTube it!) Furthermore, the music also talks about the Trinidadian’s hatred towards the white people. Funny thing is the white people who the Trinidadian’s hate enjoy their songs. I guess when you don’t understand the lyrics and just lose yourself to the rhythm of the music, the meaning of the song doesn’t matter anymore.

The second article Should Music Be Political (Link: http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/until-the-next-revolution/) also talks about music with political themes. Okay, I just got to throw this out there. In the beginning the writer mentioned that he or she did not realize before classical music could be political. Classical music has been political for a while, for example, the 1930s when America was going through depression songs such as Appalachian Springs by Aaron Copland were created to call civilians to action. Those songs were to get people to ‘talk’ (not so much talking… just thought it’d be a nice way to say it) to the government and have them improve living conditions, pull the country out of depression, and bring happiness. Now getting back on track, the writer questioned how music can be political. In my perspective, music can be political just depends on the artist who created the masterpiece. The artist, especially those who sing can come up with lyrics that talk about how the government is doing nothing about poverty or what not.

I’m done with the summary now since I made it so long, I’m going to make my reflection/reaction short and sweet. I personally don’t mind music that are political, heck I enjoy some like BYOB by System of a Down. Please YouTube this song for those who do not know the band nor heard the song. Sorry I’m just too lazy to post the link… eh… I’ll post the link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lkf45_OW3h8)

Giants! Idk I am just throwing something out there…

Summaries: (If my summary and reflections is lame, deep apologies, I’m tired and not really up to blogging. *Laughs* actually, I’m just not interested in the two articles I read even though they contain food and drinks.)

The Best Pizza in the South: Is a short story of Wright Thompson being invited to Les Miles’s, a football coach, home to watch football with him and his family. Thompson decided to buy pizza from his favorite pizza joint (Fleur De Lis Cocktail Lounge) in Baton Rouge. Coming over to the Miles’s residence he reminisces about the days when he first bought pizza  from Fleur De Lis. He went on talking about how the joint got started and how the owners of the store discovered a new way of making a delicious pizza. He then describes the quality of the pizza and how the pizza remains tasty even when it was cold. Basically, the whole article was over Thompson’s history with pizza from Fleur De Lis.

Drinking the Last Bottle of Jim Beam: Is a a short story of Wright Thompson at a house party (notably small, since the party consists of at least a dozen people or a little over that) and the whole gang telling others about themselves. Some of the folks were from different states like Joe, who discovered his deceased grandpa’s liquor in a closet and kept it to share with friends on occasions or Antonio who’s grandfather was from Spain. Each of the people shared their background stories, while passing around the liquor bottle (Jim Beam).

Honestly, I was pretty bored reading this guy’s articles and it didn’t really interest me much even though the Jim Beam article was touching. I guess I would actually give them a second thought if my day wasn’t sucking so much. Anyways, what I got from these articles was enjoy what you got and even if the things you love wither and die, they will always remain beautiful in your memories.

Okay now to butter it up and make it sound at least like I found something intriguing even if it was just the thought of a well-made pizza, with zesty sauce, soft crust, and mouth-watering melt-y cheese. The soft, semi-moist texture as you take a bite into it and the smell of your favorite topping flowing up your nostrils filling it with this irresistible aroma. Oh just thinking about it is making me salivate like Pavlov’s dogs in sight of meat powder. I’m not even going to get into the second article because it would just kill my mood. Not really up to thinking about the past and the people that had to leave this world.

Hey there, it’s been awhile since I have made a blog so please forgive me if it doesn’t sound as great as my other blogs. Well it’s second semester and here goes nothing.

Summary:

The reading this time is over the judgments made by two children a boy and a girl. Both children are the same age (11) and grade level (sixth grade), they were given a situation where this doctor created a medication that can save this man’s (Heinz) wife. However, the doctor overpriced the drug at $2000 (10x) what he spent to create the drug. Unfortunately, Heinz does not have the money to purchase the drug; therefore, he decided to steal the drug. The point was to see how each children react to the situation and their response relating to Kohlberg’s (psychologist) theory on development.

The boy’s response was approval on the man’s action, stealing the drug to save his dying wife. He reasoned that if the man did not steal than his wife would die and even if he did steal which means breaking the law, the judge would not punish him as harshly. In short, the boy’s view was a conflict between property and life. On the other hand, the girl was more elusive when she gave responded to the interviewer, her response was resolving the conflict through communication however, since Heinz did steal the medication the girl thought it was wrong for Heinz could be imprisoned for thievery and the medication could temporarily stop the wife’s illness from killing her. If Heinz is imprisoned, he would not be able to obtain more medication for his wife: temporary effect vs relationship.

Anyways, the main point is that apparently following Kohlberg’s stages of development, a child grows up and begins to think on their own. In stages 1 and 2 they develop an understanding of individual needs, then in stages 3 and 4 they develop morals and conceive many options based on societal agreement, and finally in stages 5 and 6 they make the decision that is fair to all. Following those stages the boy would seem to develop normally and mature faster than the girl who seems to be more naive in her decisions. However, I disagree completely with the claim that the boy has matured earlier than the girl. Not saying this because I am a girl or need to stand up for women/girls but the fact that the stages are biased. The stages are actually made to fit the males perspective because (no offense) men tend to do things that are most convenient and requires less work. As for females, they tend to over think and try to give up some things for their relationship, I do not know why but it is probably some maternal instinct passed down from our caveman ancestors (since I don’t like comparing us to apes… or if you don’t believe in evolution I am sorry… I’m not going to butcher Christianity because I am not a Christian and yeah… I’m done talking about religion and evolution now) so therefore, the stages do not apply to how a female thinks/develops. So the way the girl see things does not make her naive or immature, but different. I wish I could say more but I do not know the stages of female development (but I will next year… have to take developmental psych. wish me luck) but just saying that I think the children should not be compared to just Kohlberg’s stages of development, they should be compared to other psychologist’s theories on development (especially ones that include both genders) it would only be fair.