Blog #7 Anna Julia Cooper

Our class discussion about Anna Julia Cooper caught my attention this week. She talked about the struggles of power in society, and questions the inequality of it all. In Cooper's discussions, she never really thought the individual was to blame for inequality. To her, society was at fault, and the way the system all works. She didn't think it was fair to blame, for instance, a racist individual who was brought up in a racist society. They were born and brought up in such a way that it became their nature. They may not be an evil individual, they're just living in a society that raised them with certain values and norms.

It seems that throughout history, diversity has been handled in many ways. We learned about 4 different ways that our country itself has dealt with diversity. The first is pluralism, which is when the walls of minorities and majorities are broken down. All cultures are accepted, and all the different cultures still stay distinct. We talked about this as more of a "stew" where all the different cultures and values are put into one pot (or country) but the different parts can still be separated out. The second method of diversity we talked about is assimilation. This is where the minority groups are expected to conform to the majority group. This is more of a "melting pot" because you couldn't distinguish between all the cultures since they are all becoming one. Then there is segregation, which is the separation between groups. You can formally do this, such as separating bathrooms, or informally such as choosing to live in certain areas. Lastly, we learned about genocide. This is where people systematically eliminate an entire group.

All 4 of these methods have been used in our country to "deal with" diversity. I think the obvious way that is most accepting and effective is the method of pluralism. This is ideal because it allows different groups of people to stay true to themselves and have the option of keeping all the norms of their own culture. It makes our world interesting and diverse and doesn't hurt minority groups. I don't think anyone should have the power to tell people exactly how to live and conform to be a certain way, because who is to say which culture or lifestyle is the best way to live? We were not successful or peaceful during times of segregation, genocide, or assimilation, making pluralism the best way for our society to live.

Below is a short youtube clip of the Native Americans history of being treated unfairly, being one of the biggest genocides known to mankind, and example of our poor and unfair  handling of diversity.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-TyHB8fUrQ


Below is what assimilation looks like. You take many different diverse cultures and melt them into one; American.

Blog #6 Jane Addams

I enjoyed the class about Jane Addams. I'm going into the social work field and I feel as though we talk about a lot of the same concepts in those classes as we did in theory with her work. I have always thought the idea of the Hull House was cool and how she was doing something to benefit those in need and get people back on their feet and learning new skills. The idea that she took in women and children to teach them to work independently is really cool and a huge step towards realizing the full potential of females, which at the time I think was greatly underestimated. The book addressed the labor inequalities for females and how women often get sewing jobs where they work the entire day hour after hour and get paid only the bare minimum to allow them to survive on the smallest scraps of food. I think it's clearly necessary during that time period for women to learn different skills and be able to fully support themselves.

The other part of class that struck me, and I'm sure many others, was the movie clip we watched. The entire concept of the bride kidnapping was such a shock to watch and also quite disturbing. It completely, in my opinion, went against Jane Addams views we were discussing in class, especially when it came to comparing the 4 points we talked about for social democracy. One point that really stood out was that no group should be considered superior, where there clearly were superior groups in this practice, where the men of the households would decide which women could just be snatched off the streets and forced into a stranger's home. Not only the men were more in power though, the women of the male also had a sort of power over the bride-to-be. They held the woman in the film captive and forced scarves on her and dragged her as she was crying until she finally gave in. This also violates the whole point of being respectful to others, and also the point of ensuring safety. Dragging a crying human being into a room doesn't come off as safe or respectful to me at all. It was a difficult thing to watch and also a hard concept to wrap my mind around that women had to just accept and move on with their lives even if they were unhappy with the path being chosen for them. It was sad to watch, and I think some of Addams views would be useful in changing that part of society. For instance I think it would benefit that entire country to be educated and aware of the way their lives could be without the fear of the bride kidnapping practice. Also sharing experiences and memories of how people felt would benefit to see those unhappy with their culture and that a change really is necessary. I'd like to see more films of cases like this where there is great inequality. I feel like it affects enough people who live their negatively, along with people such as myself who simply watch things like this being done and feel disturbed. Addams had a good start and idea with empowering all people and changing these sorts of situations, and I think it needs to be continued.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw4GZeABlNI

Above I have the link to a 6 minute video capping up Jane Addams accomplishments, some of which I have mentioned above, with emphasis on the Hull House. And below is an image of Jane Addams herself.

Blog #5 Martineau

I thought the entire reading and class that we had about Harriet Martineau was very interesting. I like the more "feminist" views and I think it's cool that we can look more into the female perspectives because so much of that work has been lost throughout history. I really just like the basic ideas of Martineau's writing this week. I already find it extremely impressive that she overcame the struggle of being deaf and in addition conveyed so many truly important life messages. I love that the "law of social life" all in all is happiness. It was a vague description on what exactly happiness is to each and every person, which I think is almost impossible to figure out. I think there are some things that people can universally agree bring generic happiness such as physical health in terms of having food and shelter, and also freedom. I also liked the concept of applying sympathy when we look at different cultures. I think it's a really inspirational way to live to try to be understanding of other cultures without being biased by your own life and culture. We should embrace and be open to the diverse world that we live in, and also learn from one another to possibly adopt styles and cultures that may suit our lives better than what we know. I do think it's important to stay true to our own cultures and not ignore who we are, but we also need to be open minded. By practicing this open mindedness, different problems could be easily solved. We often think people are strange or that their way of doing things in wrong, simply because it's different from our own. Yet to others, some things we do in our own culture may seem extremely odd to people in other cultures. No one can really ultimately judge who's way is right or wrong, it's just clear that they are different, which is something we should embrace rather than be afraid of or judge. All of these concepts are things that I agree with that I think offer a more open and diverse way of life. It seems less judgmental to me to be open to other cultures and start celebrating our differences, and all work towards the ultimate goal of happiness. I learned that the term "anomaly" refers to a disruption from achieving goals. When thinking about these seemingly simple goals of happiness, many things can get in the way. For example, different obstacles we have come across are slavery, war, gender inequality, and social class issues. While we still have such big roadblocks in the way, it seems hard to reach certain goals such as diversity and happiness. If we can just break all of these barriers down, our world would continue to be a more accepting and peaceful place. 

Below I have a sort of hierarchy of happiness, which is what I believe is generally thought of around the world as happiness. As I said, physiological needs such as food and water is the base of happiness. Once you have that covered, I think people do search for safety, love, and esteem. Even though we are all different, these are the simple aspects of happiness that I believe all cultures can agree on and strive for. 

Sum Blog 4 Weber/Authority

Talking about Weber in the past classes brought up the different types of authority that he describes. These three types include traditional, rational, and charismatic authorities. Traditional authority is led by what it sounds like; tradition. It is something that doesn’t really change over time, and are rules that we have grown up with. This would be something along the lines of having certain traditions having to do with marriage or even religion. Second, rational authority has to do more with the law and legal actions. There are written rules that we all need to obey under this type of authority. Lastly, there is charismatic authority which is when there is a certain leader who inspires others, and is common with figures in society.

            Looking at all of these different types of authorities, I think that they all still play a role in society today. It seems like people eventually fall into one of the categories, even if it changes at some point. For instance if I apply it to my own life, I think I fall greatly into charismatic authority along with rational authority. I’ve always been inspired by a number of people in my life including past coaches, my guitar teacher, professors, and individuals that I volunteer with. Rational also plays a big role in my life because it is my go-to thought before my actions. If it’s something considered bad in society and has laws associated with it, I am most likely not to do it in order to avoid consequences. Traditional has played a very small role in my life. My outside family isn’t really in contact with mine, so the only sorts of traditions we have are small new ones started with my parents and sister. I do wish that it played a bigger role in my life, and I think it is important for everyone to have a little bit of each in theirs.

            I chose and posted the link below to a video of the classic Martin Luther King I Have A Dream Speech. He was such an influential person with great charisma that got people to truly believe and live in such ways that helped his cause. I think he’s a very charismatic leader that really changed people’s lives and had so many followers, black and white, that looked up to him and followed his lead. It’s important to have charismatic leaders like this in our lives. It gives us someone to look up to not in fear of legal actions or just following family lifestyles, but really gives us someone to make us want to do more or be better. This is probably my favorite kind of authority since it has played a pretty significant role in my life. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRIF4_WzU1w