I think it becomes very easy for us to forget what happened such a short time ago if it does not directly affect us, as my classmate stated and was demonstrated when so few people in class on Tuesday remembered the day the earthquake hit. I think that most definitely the people affected by the horrendous disaster that happened in January are still reeling from the effects, and that included people in the U.S. and all around the world with ties in Haiti. I hope that people have not moved on, although it appears as some have, from one of the most devastating natural disasters in recent history and I hope people are still motivated to help in positive ways.

I think that in some ways men are forced to conform to societal rules and social constructs but perhaps in their younger years and they may not be as vocal about the necessity to conform later. It may seem dated and overplayed but still the conception that boys don’t cry is alive and well in society today. Although there may be more men than before who do not apply to this “rule” I think it is still prevalent. Also, I think that as young men enter into the social scene where they may feel the need to conform, they do so in more subtle ways than young women so perhaps it becomes less noticeable. Also, from the boy don’t cry, or emote in general, there is the sense that it is not necessary for them to make their transformations to fit the in crowd publically known.

I think that this post is quite important not only because of the end message that all women are beautiful, which I completely agree with and more on that note that all people are beautiful and often individuals do not realize that in their own uniqueness and through their quirks they are beautiful because no one can ever be exactly the same as you. Also, there is importance in this post because of the commentary on how women are portrayed in the media. Often times, if not always, women seem to be type cast into the same roles. Conventionally beautiful women are cast as the heroines or the star where women who are perhaps not as marketable or conventionally beautiful play the friend. I also think that it is strange how often times in movies and on television, the blonde character is the good person while a darker haired counterpart will represent the bad side. I would like to think that as a society we are intelligent enough to make judgment on who is good or bad without having to see the overplayed color schemes used to tell us.
Also, my classmate said that being a woman is much more than appearance which I completely agree with. If being a woman only meant having different features than men the world may be a completely different place today. If women had been seen different merely in appearance from the beginning of time, or even for the past 300 years, civilizations would be completely different. Imagine a place with less gender discrimination, equality between women and men in the workplace and beyond. Many of the issues we still fight about today, not only in this country but around the world, could be pacified if starting long ago women and men were thought of as the same people just with some physical differences. Although this may have solved some problems, I am glad that it is not the case, in some ways. Being a woman means being able to express myself more openly than men, it means having more personal relationships and being able to show my emotions without fear of being called out as not “manly” enough. I think that even though the differences between men and women have caused innumerable problems the differences, although at times problematic, are what make us so unique and different from other species.
It may seem contradictory that I am saying at the same time if we only took physical attributes into consideration when defining the sexes that the world may have fewer conflicts then saying that I would not like for gender to only have such strict, physical definitions. I think that women (and men too!) are extremely special and without the gender struggles we would not have evolved the same way and we may be an entirely different type of peoples, be it better or worse, but the uncertainty and chance that society might be WORSE from the lack of gender differences is slightly concerning.

Well, I applaud you for taking your own personal first step towards ending global inequality and sweatshop labor. Perhaps a more realistic goal for people, who would like to continue buying clothes, is to make a conscious effort to see where the clothes you buy come from. Once you understand that your purchases may be made in less than fair working arrangements, if not sweatshops, it becomes easier to make smarter choices where and what clothes you buy. I’m not recommending that everyone be clad one hundred percent in American Apparel but making smarter choices and understanding where clothing comes from, even if it sometimes is unsavory news, can help to aid in making better clothing choices.

I personally did not eat the second piece of chocolate and even though I enjoy chocolate and am sure that although the video was extremely disturbing and saddening I will in my lifetime eat chocolate again I, at that moment could not stomach the chocolate that more likely than not had been affected by the slavery we had just witnessed in the Ivory Coast. Although I did not eat the second piece, after some contemplation, I can think of some reasons why others may have. Perhaps some people thought that the chocolate had already been manufactured so the harm was already done? Or perhaps people thought the percentage of slave labor in that individual piece was so small it was insignificant? I cannot speak for others but simply those are a few answers I came up with but I hope the message of the video was clear even to the chocolate aficionados in the room.

I definitely think there is a step two, there has to be a step two or three or four, if we ever want to end slavery and unfair labor practices in the world. While I agree a good first step is recognition of the issue and hopefully feeling like slavery needs to end but step two is where it gets more difficult. I fell like there are so many possible second steps that sometimes individuals who have experienced the first step do not know which direction to go next. If a feasible second step governmentally based or personally based? I have come up with a few of my own second steps all of which are feasible but it shows just how many second options there are in order to end slavery and global inequality. And even if your second step is not what everyone else does to approves of I think it is important to remember that any step you take towards ending global slavery is in a positive direction.

It is easy to say that we will only buy fair trade items but often people do not follow through. So a second step may be to actually alter shopping patterns to reflect the belief that slavery should end. Whether it is consciously avoiding slave made goods or strictly buying fair trade items or just being aware and trying your best to avoid slave made items as much as possible, it is a small step towards to common goal. Or maybe the best next step to protest or raise awareness so that more people can be knowledgeable about the issue and free to make their own, personal second step towards eliminating slavery. After all the more educated people there are, the more people who take the first step of feeling some way about slavery and acknowledging the continued existence of slavery, the more people there would be able and willing to take the second step. Or perhaps the best second step would be in involve government officials, be it locally as USAS is doing on campus trying to get the university to adopt the DSP, or on a more large scale basis of state and national attention (although I think that a step of this magnitude may be more like a fourth or fifth step as opposed to personal changes that can be made, go ahead and think and act big about seconds steps!) If an entire governing body, regardless of size, supports anti-sweatshop groups and puts some sort of legislation or ban in place, many people would be affected and be a part in eliminating sweatshop labor even if they had not taken the first step of feeling something about the topic. So just me contemplating for a few minutes came up with several second steps. I think it most important no matter what the second step, no matter how small you may think it seems, is important to take.

I was dumbstruck about the dolls segment of the video we watched. I was also greatly saddened and overall feeling a lot of different emotions about the video and to me it was one of the most profound clips we have watched so far in class. It is shocking to think that there has been such little progress since the study was first conducted. Also saddening was the actual reactions from the children when they were asked the questions regarding the goodness or badness of the dolls. One case, the black girl who was asked which doll was good and bad, then which doll resembled her was most telling. Why are we still conditioning children to believe these untrue things? I think that the media may have a lot to do with the children’s responses as some people in class stated. But it still seems unreal to me that the findings were virtually the same in this recent study as they were in the 1950s.

Although your case is difficult, albeit a quite interesting one, I still think that you should classify yourself (if necessary) with whichever “team” or culture you most identify with. Although your features appear somewhat white, if you grew up embracing your Puerto Rican culture, why stop embracing that part of you now? I firmly believe that these labels we have been asked to put upon ourselves, white or black and brown, are helpful overall for making quick comparisons but in cases of multiculturalism you should respond as you would in your everyday life. If someone randomly asked your ethnicity it appears as though you would not automatically say white so why respond as a white person in class? I think that in a lot of the multiracial cases the person should simply respond with whichever category they feel most connected to.

I think there are a lot of good points raised here not only by the reactions of the people asked about the census on the street but also by the commentators. I think first and foremost it is critical to understand that the term negro is used on the census as a way to include as many people as possible in the pool of census respondents and as a means to accurately count all people in the United States, not as a blatantly offensive term although by inclusion some have deemed it as “upsetting” as opposed to offensive. But what precisely is upsetting? The fact that some black people identify with the term or that it is on the census? Apparently some older black people still identify as being negro as opposed to any other term the census has placed on its survey, and I am sure they would feel confusion if the term they associate their heritage with were to be removed. It is also important to understand that although the term is antiquated it is necessary for this census this year, and it has already been said that the term will not be on the next survey in 2020. Now, with all of that being said, I think that the census has some flaws, and although it has been researched extensively, I do not think that it has been explained well enough to the public. Or perhaps the educational methods are not working effectively because people do not appear to be paying attention to the explanation. Many of the respondents on the street said they felt like they were more than a box and cannot be defined in such simple terms; do they know that you may check more than one box? I have noticed lately a lot of publicity about the census and the importance of completing it but far less information about filling it out PROPERLY, and wouldn’t a properly filled out and returned census be of the most help to the government when allocating funds?

People are often so quick to label the United States as a melting pot, yet every ten years the census asks us to identify ourselves by few of government selected categories. While this may seem counterproductive and some of the terms may seem hurtful it is important to know that the census does allocate billions of dollars in funding. Accurate responses are of the utmost importance to properly allocate the funds and the government is simply trying to achieve the most accurate sample it can obtain. Even if they have to use antiquated terms that are upsetting or even offensive to some people in order to achieve the most accurate sample of the population.

Thank you for spelling out precisely how gender and race issues can relate. Upon reading posts on the other blog topic some posters were questioning how the menstruation issue was relevant in a race relations course. To me, the connection seems an easy one to make. Often gender issues are pushed to the back burner but in reality the issues of race and gender are so similarly tied. Both parties are looking for understanding and to demolish the stereotypes and inequalities that both women and minorities face. Thankfully, race issues have not taken the backseat of sorts that gender equality issues have.