Shift Happens

We had to watch a 6 minute video on Youtube called "Shift Happnes: Globalization and the Information Age", and give our opinions.

Here is the link, I suggest everyone who sees this, watches it: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ljbI-363A2Q

My Thoughts on the video:

This little 6-minute video blew my mind. I had heard that we as a nation were falling
behind some of the other countries, but this was just amazing.

I think the world is becoming way too over-populated. Especially in America. Teens having children, people in severe poverty having child after child. I think a lot of this could be curbed if the governmentwould stop handing these people assistance. Yes, times would be tough, but people would not be having child after child just to keep this assitance. If you cannot afford to take care of your children, then you should not have more! Simple as that.

Alot of people in this country complain about China, and other countries. I think we could learn a few things from them. I saw that in these other countries that we Americans complain about, that they have more children with very high IQ's, than we have children, period, in our entire country. I think Americans have becoming increasingly lazy. The "No child Left Behind Act", that basically pushes our children through like cattle in school, graduating them just for basically showing up is pathetic. People are more worried about their child's "feelings" and being their childs' friend, instead of preparing them for their future. This needs to change. All we are going to have is a bunch of soft, lazy, overweight children with no skills, other than playing video games and eating french fries, playing on their I-Phones.

I was amazed, alone, at not just how much things have changed since 1900,  but just in the past 5 years since this video was made. Myspace is practically nonexistent, and Facebook is a giant. Computers are doing more and more by the second, nevermind by the day.

I think technology is taking from our lives daily. You do not see as many people at the gym, or running down the street; now, people stay inside on Facebook all day long, or if they want to exercise? They have a video game for that, so you don't have to leave your house! Gone are the days of sending mail with a stamp on it, destroying millions of jobs at the United States Postal Service. That personalization is gone, and hello e-mail and "wall-posts". How many of us buy a newspaper anymore? Even the Sunday paper coupons can be found and used staight from your Smartphone these days.

Yes we are advancing everyday, and that has its good points, to try and catch up with the other countries. But we are becoming so sheltered and inpersonal, that it seems we are going down a slippery slope..I am almost afraid to see what the world will be like in another 50 years, seeing how things have changed in the past 10 alone.

Pros and cons of Urban vs Rural Life: Carbon Footprints

I have personally lived in some large cities, smaller suburbs and now a very rural area: for our family, we prefer the rural life: no traffic, you can see the stars at night, very low (practically nonexistent compared to the city) crime, very quiet. Our dream locale of living by the water. Of course, it is not for everyone. There are people who would go for lack of better words, "stir-crazy" if they "had to" live out here. Everything is a driving distance from our area: it takes 10-15 minutes to find a gas station, 15+ minutes to get to the grocery. The nearest major city is approximately 3 hours away, depending on traffic. There is a mall, but it is almost an hour away.

There are definitely a lot of good points to living here, but if you are thinking about our carbon footprint, is it better on the environment to live in an area such as ours? I believe it is. Yes, we have to drive to get anywhere. We do not have sidewalks (I do not think Marion has a single sidewalk!), even to get to a playground is a good 15 minutes drive, not just a walk down the street like when I grew up in the city. There are hybrid vehicles which help, although they are expensive. More people in the country tend to recycle and compost more, as we do not have local trash pickup but are reponsible for these things ourselves. But I still believe we are better off here than the carbon footprint caused by the cities.

Urban areas have their ups and downs as well. The up side? Many things are within walking distance, or there is the option of public transit, in the form of bus or train, even ferry service in some areas, so many people do not even need a vehicle. There are more things to do in the city, so people are not bored. Many jobs are available in the city as well and there is not a long commute for many.

The bad? There are many factories though which produce literally tons of harmful toxins in the air. There are less trees in the city, so less natural oxygen to breathe in. Studies show that people that live in the city are more stressed than those who live in the rural areas; no big surprise there, that stress is harmful to one's health as well.

There are many things that we can do to lessen our carbon footprint in the world, and it is not hard to do; you do not have to go completely vegetarian, or stop using gas powered vehicles all together. Try this free calculator out(http://www.nature.org/greenliving/carboncalculator/index.htm/) ; you put your information in (no personal information) about the way you live your day to day life, and look at the numbers of how much your carbon footprint is, and see many simple tips on how you can live a greener life, and make this planet a better place to live, whether you are a big city dweller or are a large family on a rural farm.

Is Wal-Mart good for America?

Is Wal-Mart good for America?
Many people will say no. I watched a documentary this week on this very subject on Frontline (on PBS. org).
The naysayers to this argument complain it takes away from work here in the USA; it puts the local community out of a job. Small businesses are closing
because they can't afford to keep up with the "Low Everyday Prices" from the retail giant.
According to the site, in 2006 Wal-Marts sales topped 350 Billion dollars. How many people could that help in this country?
To be fair, Wal-Mart gives a lot of money back to the communities, although it cannot give back the lives to many of these people.
Some of the locals that live by a Wal-Mart were making more than $10/hour. Now that the local Wal-Mart has gone up, They can get a job, but that would mean taking a pay cut in some, if not most cases.
As much as I agree, in my opinion I think Walmart IS good for America. Sure the pay is not great, the employees are not always
friendly and some do not provide good customer service; but for the most part, as much as people complain, they will still go to Wal-Mart. WHY?
Because the prices ARE cheap. In many single parent homes, or people that are considered low income or even middle income, know they can do all their shopping, and STILL
have money left over from their paychecks at the end of the week, to save, or pay bills, or put gas in their cars to get to work.
The products made in China that are sold at Walmart...people complain. If those products were made at a factory in the USA, do you REALLY think
the prices would be the same? Of course not! Costs of living are much different in China. I can not say with a straight face that ANYONE
in this country would be willing to work 50-60 hours a week and only make $100 a month. A MONTH! You cannot even get two tanks of gasoline for $100.
This is the reason why their prices are so low. If they were having all these products made in the USA, you could see the prices
go up by as much as 10%.
People complain about their practices, by not buying products local, and wages in which they pay, but at the end of the day, they are
a business. As much as people dislike the way they do things, they will continue to shop at Wal-Mart, because when all is said and done,
you get the most for your dollar there; and unless you are a millionaire, you need to watch your spending, as an American citizen.

Domestic Division of Labor

We learned about a chapter on Domestic Division of labor, and I was asked to post my thoughts on what I learned out of this, and/or how I feel in general.

Back when our grandparents were kids being raised by our great-grandparents, things, understandably, were very different. Can you imagine what life must have been like around 1900? I can imagine the domestic division of labor was very much different than what it is now: women were expected to take care of everything in the house: the cooking, cleaning, having the children, taking care of the children, doing all the laundry, peobably even some farm chores, if they lived on a farm. The husband was to work outside the home, and/or do the "man" work in their farm or yard- mowing the grass, building and mending fences, barns, etc.

Nowdays things are much different: men and women are sharing the labor- more and more women are going to work and school, there are many stay at home dads; depending on what shift they work, depends on how much the other parent has to do; not to mention if you are a single parent, you have to fulfill both those roles- taking care of the children, housework, and outdoor work if you own your home. Many women will roll up their sleeves and do the "man" work these days; and men are cooking and doing laundry (well mine does, anyway).

Being a nursing student, we have been lucky enough to hire a nanny to care for the kids, and my husband does most, if not all, the cooking and cleaning. The only thing I seem to be required to do, is get through nursing school. I am very blessed when it comes to the division of labor, although I feel guilty at times, like I am not doing enough.

There are still families out there who live like it is 1900 still: they live on a farm in the middle of nowhere, the man goes to work and the woman stays home and takes care of the kids and hosuework. It is nice to see the American family evolving more though, that way things are equal, fair, and both feel like they are productive members of society.

Gender Inequality

It is sad to still see gender inequalities in todays' society. A woman nowadays not only can run the home, but also works full time, runs errands; and still, men are seen as the patriarchs? I find that hard to believe. In the societies that have a mother and father (like my own household), everything is split in two equal parts, and we are both seen as the "patriarch" of the family, not one over the other. But still, women in 2012 are still being paid less money than their male counterparts in many fields of work. It is getting better than the 1970's to now; between 1970 and 2009, the ratio of men to women's earnings for full time, year round work has increased from 62 to 82.1%. Why, I do not understand, is it not 100% across the board? Women do just as much work in these fields as their male counterparts, and are getting treated unfairly when it comes to pay. I can only hope that 10-20 years from now, it will be equal.

Global Inequality

This past week we had to read chapters on Global Inequality, and I have to say that many in America just do not realize how good of a life they have. I am usually always talking about how minumim wage should be increased, when the subjec is brought up. We complain often about the "1%" of our country; apparently it is like this all around the world, but there are many that are MUCH worse off than we are.

Barbie dolls, as I read about in the text, is a very popular child's toy in this country; but did you know it has never been produced in this country? It is always made in the countries where they can get them the cheapest, usually the most stricken by poverty, where the workers make maybe $1 per day. Here in this country we have become so entitled and complain so easily. Our minimum wage workers "only" make $7 and change an hour. Some of these countries making our latest tech gadgets (cell phones, tablets, etc) that we HAVE to have it seems, have workers that only make pennies an hour. But the heads of these corporations making the gadgets, dolls, cars, etc are rolling in the dough; just like some of the CEO's of large companies in this country that we all seem to complain about.

I think if every American sat down and really researched how badly some other countries have it, and how easy we really do have it here, we would be complaining a whole lot less.

How much does social class matter in the USA today?

Honestly, I do not think it matters as much today as it did years ago; or at least a lot less than it did years ago. Reading in my textbook, I was able to place myself right smack dab in the middle class group, but why should it matter?

Nowadays, it does not matter what class you are from. There are kids that grow up in the upper class, and get out on there own, and do horribly (unless they have a trust fund); there are also children that come from the lower class groups who go on to make it big in life (like our current President Of The United States). There are children you see on the news, who are borderline homeless, and go on to win full ride scholarships and become CEO's. Just because you are stuck with a "label" of Lower or Upper or even Middle Class, does not mean that is where you will be stuck for the rest of your life.

Growing up, most of my earlier childhood, we were poor, very much in the lower class. Today I am considered middle class. Not because of my upbringing, but because I was smart enough to go to school and push myself to become something in life. I would rather be lower class, and learn to appreciate the things in life by having to earn them, rather than be the child of a CEO, say of BP or Exxon-Mobile, have everything given to me, and not know what hard work is really all about.

I checked out the PBS site, People like us, and looked around. Even played the game to decorate a living room and what you pick supposedly shows what "Class" you are, or would be. I thought it was humorous, although tongue in cheek to say the least with some of the comments. Talk about stereotypical. Possessions should not dictate who we are or how we are looked at.

A study done in 1997 by Bynner, followed 9,000 people all born in 1970, to see who was coping the best with transitioning into adulthood (they were 26 at the time of the results), and it showed that those children with fathers in a professional field of work did better in transitioning. Yeah, no kidding! They probably had many things handed to them- if they had a hard time in the real world, mommy and daddy were there to help. If these children did not have a father figure in their lives, more than likely, their mother had to work full time, and they did not have a chance to be children; if anything, I would think it made them stronger.

Children of poverty are NOT doomed, in my opinion. They are only doomed if they make the wrong decisions in life, like crime, drugs, or becoming high school drop outs because they do not have a good mentor in their lives. Many children of poverty go on to be very successful in life, they just need to have the drive to succeed. I should know, I am living proof.

Week 6: Do you think Americans today are more isolated due to technology?

In a word, Yes. I do believe that Americans are becoming more isolated by the day. When I was growing up in the 80's and 90's, we didn't have as much technology at our disposal. We went outside and played until dark. Video games were around, but that was a rainy day activity.

Nowadays, you see children going to Kindergarten with cell phones. Yes, I can understand in case of emergency, it is nice to have; but if we had an emergency in Kindergarten back in 1984, that's what the telephone in the Principal's office was for.

People are becoming more dependent on technology, and although I can see the good points, there are some bad points. Nowadays everything is done "via email". Not very ofdten do people have to have the face to face conversations, which is shortening our social life more and more. Some teens text so often that the question rises in my mind, what are they going to do when they get into the real world? Not having that face time in many important situations, but using texts and email instead (even for things like breaking up with girlfriends and boyfriends, or sending homework, or talking with their parents about important issues) is just going to hurt them in the long run.

Yes technology is a great thing, and advances keep us interested...they are always coming out with bigger and better things; but I think the way things are headed, we are going to reach a place in the future where interviews are all done via email...and people will not know how to act in face to face situations as much, as the "older generation" dies off.

Week 5: The Criminal Justice System: Are Prisons The Answer?

After reading in my textbook, I decided to write about Prisons, and if the use of them is really necessary: for very violent crimes (for example, first degree murder), the answer would be yes. To me, they are classified as monsters. An example would be the Colorado shootings  at the movie theatre, just a few months ago. But when it comes to drug dealers, petty crimes, theft, I believe it costs way to much to house an inmate, and for the smaller crimes, such as theft and drug dealing, I can honestly say prison would not change a person, in my opinion.

If a criminal wants to do these things, what is sitting in a cell for 30 or 60 days going to do to a person? Especially when some (not all, I know for many it is probably very rough) have it better in prison than they do on the street! Think about it: 3 meals a day, an area to exercise, read, even take college courses (as I saw in "A Class Divided"), and a warm place to sleep (even if it is a concrete pad). I can see why some homeless end up in prisons repeatedly. It's a better life IN prison, than out in the street!

I think if we are going to spend money on the non-murderous criminals, it should be in the form of a rehab of some sort. Forced counseling should be used first, and exhaust that opportunity before just throwing them in jail.

Maybe the guy who robbed a bank, was trying to feed his wife and children, because he got laid off and they lost their home, and are now living in a car. No, it is not right to commit this crime. But is throwing him in prison for X amount of years, away from his children the answer? I really don't think so. I think some extreme community service, and mandatory counseling is the answer.

Some people do belong in prison: the ones who are a physical threat to others. On the Eastern Shore alone, I see reports of people getting their 9th (NINTH!) DWI, and they get a slap on the wrist; they get their license taken away, but they continue to drive. That person would be considered, by me, as a threat to others: what will happen when he gets that 10th DWI? Will it take killing someone? Have they tried treatment programs?

But on the other side of that, I hear of people going to prison on ACCUSATIONS of rape, or writing a bad check. America seriously needs to rethink its priorities.

Week Four: Nature or Nurture?

Nature or Nurture is sometimes a heated debate, and I can see why. I see the same arguments daily on similar topics, like "Religion vs The Big Bang Theory", "Pro-Life vs Pro Choice", even "Democrat vs Republican" can get pretty ugly.

When it comes having to side with the Nature side of the debate, I can see that side. But I could not just choose a side, as I personally feel a little of both is "the right side".

Nature, for obvious reasons: men have more Testosterone, therefore are considered to be the main provider (by some), or the hunter. Women are biologically the only ones who can give birth to children. These are the obvious, but they are there. Women are born with a competitiveness in them, back to the cave person days where the women fought competitively to get the mate they wanted, and have strong children. The same can be said all these years later, but in the form of reality television, winning at competetions to win the man.

When it comes to the nurture side of the debate, this is just as important. In our society, children learn at very young ages how to act like boys, or how to act like girls; Boys get monster trucks and G.I. Joe's, and girls have dresses and Barbie dolls. They are pushed in at this young age, even as infants, being dressed in all pink, or all blue. With the girls, you sign them up for dance classes and tea parties. Boys play in dirt and play football. Eventually they grow up and think, as a child, "this" is the way they are supposed to be. Anything out of the norm is looked down upon, according to the society of the twenty-first century.

Example: The little boy who wanted to wear dresses and his father wore a skirt to support his son. Should our children be allowed to express themselves individually like this? Some of the reponses I recorded was this parent should have child services called on him, and some saying he will be to blame when his child gets picked on. Very rare did I see a parent or any adult cheering him on to do what he felt was right for his child, to step out of the approving eye of today's society. Maybe instead of these children picking on others for not following our countries' social norms, we should teach our children to be tolerant and accepting of others. Parents need to learn by example.

Society definitely has a major influence on how our children today are raised. Even hundreds of years ago, men were automatically considered the hunters, the more superior. Was it because they were larger? I am sure there are women in those villages that were more smart than some of the men. Because the women were smaller, it is my belief they were seen as less superior, and just learned how to stay at home and raise children.

I wonder what society will bring in another 100 years....

Week Three: Concepts and Cultures

After watching this video clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyHSjv9gxlE ), I can clearly see that Hugh Laurie is first off a very funny guy, and he clearly got a laugh out of the audience.

From my personal opinion, I think British humor from BBC is kind of strange: sure, you get a laugh, but it is a stupid-funny kind of laugh. The so-plain and basic-so-it-is-funny kind of humor obviously got a laugh out of the audience overseas, as they are used to this kind of humor. For me, I had to watch it a few times.

When it comes to TV shows, and many movies, it seems these companies/actors seem to think basic, dry or "stupid-funny" humor is the way to go. It just does not cut it for me. I like the more intelligent humor, humor that makes you use your mind.

I guess the clip is showing that many "ballads" like this one are overly done to people in other countries. To those who have seen any of the Monty Python shows, however, I get the same feeling....the humor in this "song" comes off like one of the British comedy shows. Goofy, but not so funny you want to tell others about it. All it got from me was a brief chuckle, but "goofy or stupid-funny" was the flag that went up. Seems there are more than one type of comedy!

Assignment 2: The Stanford Prison Experiment

My Views on the Stanford Prison Experiment.

 

I was mainly disgusted by this research experiment; stripping them naked was uncalled for as it is, although I know this happens in some prisons even today. I know the prisoners (in real life) have done awful things to be put in prison in the first place, but  is no reason to treat them like vermin either. I do not think prisoners nowadays deserve internet access, cable TV, things like that; but beating them, withholding food, putting them in physical danger health wise, is not ok to me.

 Shooting freezing g cold carbon dioxide at the “prisoners” was taking things too far, at men they had half naked, in a cold basement. Why not just stab them in the arms with vials of live pneumonia and kill them?

Not allowing the “prisoners” to wash, eat in some cases, or use basic hygiene, is a horrible thing to do to some people who were kind enough to volunteer for this experiment.

They could have just put them in a jumpsuit and stuck them in a cell, no tv or books, fed them through a hole in the door, and let them out into the hallway they used as a “yard” in the school basement once a day for a half hour, and see what happened to their state of mind that way. Not put them in physical danger from the men they designated as prison guards, who after a few days let the power go to their head.

When Dr. Zimbardo’s Yale alum came to visit and asked him what the independent variable was- when Dr. Zimbardo got angry, he should have seen that as a problem and cancelled the study right away, as he was getting too deeply involved, instead of putting the lives of normal innocent men at more of a risk. I feel he was a selfish individual and should have been jailed for putting American citizens at risk, and charged with assault. He may not have been the person assaulting the “prisoners”, but he was ultimately responsible.

In real life, it sickens me that this kind of behavior happens in prisons all around the country. Some people are in prison for check fraud, and small things like that. Why do they deserve to be treated this way by these prison guards on a power trip? Some guards nowadays, you see them beating and humiliating the prisoners; I believe when it gets to that point, the guards should be fired and arrested for assault as well.

They could have used a less invasive (and kept others out of potential harm) way of researching, like the use of surveys, or Ethnography: with surveys, they could have sent actual paper surveys to prisoners out on parole, to ask how they were treated, and how life was. If they really wanted an experience, Dr. Zimbardo could have used a form of Ethnography, and had himself put into a real prison, the whole nine yards, for a week, and then he would have had plenty to write about. A form of research like that could never be performed today, almost 40 years later, due to the unethical nature of the study.

www.prisonexp.org/

Assignment 1: Introduction- All about me, in a million words or less.

Yes, I have finally reached the 21st century, and created a blog. It is expected as a part of my grade, so what better time to start? So here's my introduction!

My name is Valerie Graves; I am a 30-something (I'm not telling!) happily married mother to three (very adorable, as strangers tell me) children, ages 3.5, 2.5 and 17 months (as of August 2012); I know what you are thinking..."wow, they have been busy!". I get that a lot. After 10 (give or take a few) years, and an ex husband later, my now husband and I were blessed with one....and then another, and another. Due to some major health problems, we stopped with baby number 3, and shut the factory down. The way we feel is we are blessed to have the children we do have.


We moved to Delmarva 2 years ago from New England (where I grew up), after finding a beautiful house right near the Chesapeake Bay, but still in the middle of nowhere, and we love it here; well, besides the jurassic dragonflies and horseflies, THOSE I can do without.

It has always been a dream of mine to work in the medical field. I went to a semi private high school in Walpole, MA and majored in Veterinary Sciences, and graduated in 1998; fourteen years later, I am finally realizing my dream of getting into the field of nursing. I am attending ESCC, and will graduate in the summer next year.

My goal after graduating with my LPN, is to begin working at a local hospital full time, and continue on to get my Associate's degree as a RN, then continue on for my BSN. My overall goal is to become either a Nurse Practitioner or Physicians' Assistant.

I am taking this Sociology course for a few reasons: one, it is required to get into some Registered Nursing programs. Two, I am a very opiniated person (I am a Democrat, pro choice, and pro-equality for all American citizens in our county), and I feel Sociology would be a great course to use my opinion, and learn at the same time. Three, to be able to converse with my fellow students on some very important topics; and lastly, four, because I enjoy the Psychology/Sociology types of courses, because it makes you think about life more deeply.

As for hobbies and interests, I love my family, travel, amusement parks (my husband and I just went to Busch Gardens in Williamsburg for the first time a few weeks ago, it was great!), the beach/ocean, horseback riding, fishing, country music and classic rock. I do not have time for television anymore due to school, but when I do watch television it is Bones, NCIS, Grimm, the local news and especially any stand up comedy (I have a sense of humor-can you tell yet?).

I look forward to the semester, getting to know my fellow classmates, and learning something new about the field of Sociology!