Equal Value to Differences

Someone shouldn't have to change the way they are in order to get respect from others. When it comes to gender inequality, I think this principle should apply. I know the gender equality movement has many aspects and is a complicated one for society. But on a very personal level, I think the movement is a way for women to cry out for respect and appreciation we should be getting, but aren't. Whether our societies, families, or own behaviors contribute to this respect deficit, it's a hurtful reality for women all over the world. I wonder if this drives women to try to be more masculine than they would otherwise. Let women be happy being mothers and daughters and wives and let them be praised and admired for them. Some of the world's most influential women were exceptional mothers and wives.

But if women feel drawn to other callings, let them also be praised when they achieve.

I think it's interesting how different societies assign value to a life and how they do this differently. In some societies, women are literally less valuable. I think western cultures are just now realizing how wrong this is - at least I hope this is the case. Whether poor or rich, man or woman, black or white, our lives are all of equal value, but not necessarily equal. We're unique too, and I think that paradox is the beauty of being human.

A Personal Road to Equality

I think that as Americans, we have a lot to consider when it comes to global stratification because we are a richer nation. We must be cautious not to treat people from other nations who may be less privileges with any less respect. We should always be cognizant of the needs and cultures of others, and that they are often very different from our own.

The United States is known throughout the world as a very giving nation, but I think sometimes that giving is turns into a convenient cash-toss at whatever cause has grabbed our attention.

When the Haiti earthquake devastated that country, we responded fast and we responded in person. We saw the destruction of that country and understood their pain enough to get dirty to help those people improve their lives. I wish our nation knew how to respond in such a personable way all the time, not just when there are disasters.

Is "Fitting In" Fueling Social Class?

I think social class in modern America matters a lot. I think this truth is masked by the "politically correct movement" which encourages everyone to treat everyone the same. However I think attitude doesn't translate into our realities because of the economic conditions, personal experiences, and communities that make us different and divide us.

The controlling concept of acceptance is what stands out to me the most as I reflect on social class discussions I have encountered for this class and in my life-time. And in my mind, the concept of acceptance and non-acceptance goes hand-in-hand. By this I mean that people shun or treat people differently because other members of their social class do. We all do this because we want to be accepted by those who matter most to us.

I wonder if we live in social classes, whether blatantly or not, because it is not accepted in our social groups to treat others a certain way. Generally, a poor member of a minority group associated with gangs would be frowned on to try to hang out with a middle-class white person. Members of a well-established community club or organizations would collectively feel uncomfortable to allow someone with an impoverished background participate in their meetings. A club member would have to be brave enough to break a social norm to have meaningful contact with this poor person.

According to the text of Introduction to Psychology, studies show it is hard for people to break out of the social class when poor. There are many reasons for this, but high among them is a lack of education or means. The text says that children who are poor don't know what to aspire to. I wonder if this is because there is no motivation to be accepted by another social group, so they don't do anything.

I personally identified with the story of Dena on the PBS special "People Like Us: Social Class In America." Like her I moved to the Washington D.C. area to build a career, but I struggle with the pulls of a slower, more modest life-style I left on the West Coast. It has always been important to me to fit in where I grew up. It worries be that I've changed too much and may never fit in at home. The other stories in that documentary also illustrated that people are controlled by who does or does not accept them and how they do, or don't reach out to others.

The messages of equality that we have heard in America for decade now are important and I think they've made a difference. But I think until we can all truly learn to put others before ourselves, social classes will always exist.

Technology Isolates

I think that technology makes our society more connected, but less personal.

You're at a bar with a bunch of people. Your family and close friends live far away so you just found some acquaintances to watch the big game with. The Unites States scores and instead of calling your family or friends, you mass text them, or tweet, or check our iphone from such messages from them.

It's a good friend's birthday. Instead of calling them, or visiting, or sending a card, you post a sweet little message on facebook. A lot of people see the message, but you have no idea what kind of day your friend had, or how he is doing in general.

You're at the office. Instead of having an important conversation with some co-workers, you e-mail. It takes to long to get everyone together. Some people understand what you said, but others don't. There are misunderstandings and feelings get hurt.

I think that people are more connected because of technology in the sense that we can now easily reach hundreds of people in our lives instantly. They can reach other people. As the authors of Introduction to Sociology point out, our technological networks are huge. Organizations now have large, loose networks and this is quickly leading to a more global society.

However, I think that we are actually less connected in a personal sense than society before the technology boom. I am guessing that rare are the days when we just spend time playing board games, talking on the front porch, eating around the table or having people over for dinner parties.

Criminals Among Us?

I believe that criminal justice programs are not significantly effective in reducing recidivism rates because they don't really connect criminals to their communities.

I would not go so far as to advocate for community-based punishment. Instead, I am a proponent of community-based restoration.

From what I know, pprograms offered the incarcerated do offer beneficial education, therapies or support. But for the most part, they are all offered in the context of the criminal justice system.

I think programs that incorporated active contact with their communities post-release would give inmates a chance to be restored to their own worlds. Perhaps programs could incorporate the prisoners churches, schools, families, or organizations in their communities. It would place them in a position to receive support from from people who understand where they come from. It would also give them an opportunity to give back to their community.

The problem with such an approach to reducing recidivism is that the community must also cooperate, and without unfairly judging or discriminating against former inmates.

How Treatment Defines Us

The "A Class Divided" experiment was deeply fascinating to me on several levels. Teacher Jane Elliot brilliantly created a social environment in her class which debased some of her students based on their eye color.

Depending on whether they above or bellow their classmates, the children responded by either discriminating or acting as if they deserved to be oppressed.
What resonated with me most strongly about this experiment is how quickly the children of the "lower class" conformed and accepted their inferiority. They lived with the stigma assigned to them.

After being mistreated because of his eye-color, one little boy quipped, "The way they treated you felt like you didn't even want to try to do anything."
Elliot asked her students what it means to have brown eyes. "It means that we're stupid. Well, not that, but...," he said, struggling to find words to express what had happened in his classroom.

I don't mean to disregard the significance of how quickly all of us can discriminate and mistreat others, given an excuse. The famous Stanford Prison Experiment also taught us that. However, it's interesting to see how we act also fuels how others treat us.

Men such as Martin Luther King and Frederick Douglas pushed for African Americans to rise up and defy the discrimination. I think that Booker T. Washington's exhortation to his people to make the most of life where ever they are is priceless for all minorities. I believe discrimination is excruciatingly painful, but what we all do despite of it is what will shape who we are at our cores.

Nature v. Nurture? It Depends

I believe it is our environment, coupled with our inner traits that makes us who we are. It is difficult to say which plays the biggest role, but I dare to suggest that it depends on the person and the life they lead.

Like yellow and red together form a completely different color than blue and white together. For artists, which colors dominate depend on the strength of the colors.

I've done no personal research on the classic nature versus nurture debate, but it seems that researchers psychologists have somewhat reached an agreement that both play I role. My hypothesis that nature versus nurture is situational rests on my observations of people I know, or have interviewed as a journalist.

For some, living in extremely difficult situations such as a severely impoverished environment causes a person to rebel and even resort to breaking the law to survive. In that scenario I would argue that nature played a stronger role in shaping that person's life. Another person in the exact same situation may rise above their challenges to make something of their lives. I think of Prudence, the star of Music by Prudence. The documentary is about a band of disabled people in impoverished Zimbabwe. They rose above their circumstances to create music together, and now they are known throughout the world.