en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/7260450 Comments by Anton_Trocht http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/26/week-eight-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment693276496 I also don’t understand why it creates such a stir at times; it’s probably because of hotbed issue race is. Another thing that is comparable to affirmative action are government benefits that are provided to such a small number of Americans and are an extremely minute portion of our overall spending. However, we have clearly seen how strongly both of these issues have been argued for as well as against. It was unfortunate to find out how small of a percentage affirmative action actually benefits; it is absolutely necessary in certain situations. As far as nepotism goes; I find that it is almost necessary in today’s society. Even though I firmly believe in a merit-based system, I find that the ‘testing’ system in many countries is biased towards one specific type of ‘test-taker’. Just like affirmative action is necessary at times, I think nepotism is also beneficial and useful at times without being harmful. Sat, 3 Aug 2013 20:44:42 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/26/week-eight-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment693276496 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/26/week-eight-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment693273549 In response to the question asked at the beginning of the lecture on how to create a more equitable system: I say create a merit-based system solely based on personal ambition and skill. This is theoretical, of course, but I believe that once we begin focusing on people’s strengths as opposed to the faults that we may see within them, it would be a start to a more equal society. This would essentially weed out the people who are ambitious and want to work hard, and allow the slackers to pretty much, slack. The idea of affirmative action is controversial to myself as well as many others; we are acknowledging that we’re providing a group a certain advantage due to their skin color or ancestry. I feel that the government should have a limited amount of access into our personal lives, yet I understand the fact that certain groups are discriminated against and these sorts of measures are sometimes necessary. In addition, we can also argue that white people have benefited from affirmative action throughout the course of history. We have gained so many benefits socially, economically, and more due to our skin color alone. This is the reason that I hold strongly with creating a merit-based system where our advances in life are based off our ability to achieve. The short-film from the Oprah show is another example as to why affirmative action is sometimes necessary. The students at one school couldn’t nearly compete with the students at the more ‘advanced’ school due to a sheer lack of resources. This also leaves the students at the poorer school less prepared for the college as well as the real world. Affirmative action is sometimes necessary in situations like this to create some form of equity. One of the biggest issues with providing affirmative action is that it is difficult to find the funding for it. A lot of opponents to affirmative action feel that the government shouldn’t play a role in providing benefits to a given group; this makes affirmative action unfair in a sense, which is why it has become increasingly difficult to provide it. I have experienced or have seen affirmative action at hand several times throughout my life. One of them being during my years in a private high school where there two black males in the entire graduating class; oddly enough, they both acknowledged the fact that the reason they were in the school in the first place was due to affirmative action. They didn’t have a problem with this fact because they knew they were better off attending that school as opposed to the one they were zoned for. We got a chance to go to one of the high schools they were going to attend and it was the complete opposite. The majority of the school was consisted of colored people; the school was in clear violation of capacity limits for any given classroom. Sat, 3 Aug 2013 20:36:05 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/26/week-eight-lesson-14-affirmative-action/#IDComment693273549 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment690816647 The story about Jackson was just as appalling to me. It was shocking on two different levels: firstly, the gruesome accounts were shocking to hear about from anyone when you hear about lopping of noses and taking scalps; secondly, this man was the 7th President of the United States which goes to show something about our country. Sam was absolutely right about business and landowners shaping immigration policy, but I wish he showed how relevant it was to politics. It’s absolutely relevant to elections because it is showing a very distinct standpoint for the politician; if he votes on immigration bills one or another, it will make a complete difference in whether or not he will get a majority of Democratic versus Republican voters, or vice versa. Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:18:40 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment690816647 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment690811372 The story from Jackson’s autobiography was disturbing to say the least. It makes you wonder how the Europeans who came to settle here could call the Native Americans, ‘savages’; especially after they: cut their noses for body counts, spread smallpox, collected their scalps, murdered women and children, and more. I would have to agree that the relationship between immigration and the United States is revolved around business. They provide labor at a time where it is needed, especially when they need cheap labor. However, it is also politically relevant; the video mentioned that every year that ended in a ‘6’ was pro-immigration. Those years in political terms are midterm elections for Congress as well as an important time for presidential elections. Politicians want to get elected or re-elected so they will become pro- ‘whichever issue provides votes’. Also, sometimes Presidents will attempt to pass landmark bills that will leave them with a presidential legacy. Immigration is a very relevant issue due to the fact that I have parents who are immigrants. My mother was able to attain citizenship and assimilate into the general culture here even though she holds on strongly to Russian culture as well. My dad, in contrast, was never able to do the same; he always saw himself as a Russian and had no desire to integrate into the society. He lived here for over 15 years as an illegal alien and eventually left for Russia again. I remember around that time, immigration was a very hot topic and I finally began to understand from the perspective of Mexican immigrants. I thought that ‘Congo’ bill was absolutely racist; it was a little surprising to hear the crazed person from the video in the lecture compare illegal immigrants to criminals. Hearing about the Congo story reminded me about a story of a friend we met in college; his uncle taught his dogs how to essentially attack and bark at people of color or people he thought were immigrants. You can imagine the awkward conversations we had the few times we went to visit him. America will never be able to call itself a ‘melting pot’ until we relax our immigration laws. This is why the claim made in the previous lecture in regards to America being more of a ‘mixed salad’. However, I feel like the trend of America only using its immigrants for financial and economic benefits will continue for a long time. And even if we relax our border controls, they will never be on a level playing field as people who are regarded as ‘real’ Americans. It is surprising to see many Americans complain about the cheap labor provided, but in hindsight, I’m surprised by many of the viewpoints that a vast amount of Americans have. Wed, 31 Jul 2013 02:07:01 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-13-immigration/#IDComment690811372 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689065228 I have to completely agree with you on this absurd cultural war over LGBT rights. It angers me even further due to the fact that many of the people who are so against it claim to be politically ‘conservative’ and yet have no idea that the entire concept is built around staying out of people’s affairs. I understand the point that you made with comparing to a potential battle with sports fans versus ‘bookworms’; however, the reason that it isn’t an issue is because of how we culturally view race. We already see people bullying other people of whom they consider ‘nerds’ but race and gay rights are much more hotbed issues in this day and age. Sun, 28 Jul 2013 19:09:35 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689065228 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689062323 The lecture on multiculturalism was by far one of the most interesting ones this semester. It made me question how much the United States was truly a ‘melting pot’; it became more evident that it is more of a ‘salad bowl’. We’re all mixed up together but the ingredients aren’t quite fully blended. I’ve always been proud of growing up in a diverse area but the lecture made me come to the realization that we weren’t fully integrated. You want to have more of the label of being diverse and politically correct as opposed to actually putting it into practice. The majority group wants to assimilate the minority group and possibly even use that to their advantage; but they will never actually accept that minority group and allow them to be on an equal playing field (only in very rare instances). I also enjoyed the fact that the lecture highlighted how segregated churches actually are; in my opinion, most religions have been the biggest hypocrites in the course of human history. The ‘treat thy neighbor’ notion is only applied in instances when that neighbor is like you and shares the same ideologies. However, they may not accept them or want them to be a part of their church, yet they still would want them to convert. They want them to convert because it only provides more prominence and power for that denomination. I also wanted to make a note on the question regarding whether or not it matters which flag you wave. I feel like it shouldn’t matter at all, if anything, that sense of nationalism and pride only brews conflict. Nationalism and pride in one’s people has given rise to mass exterminations of another type of people. One of the most obvious examples of this was the Holocaust where Hitler was able to convince the majority of the German people to follow his maniacal quest through propaganda and nationalism. Therefore, I don’t think it should be an issue whatsoever and there should be an increased focus on globalization. An interesting thing to mention is the amount a minority group can be cast out but the majority group seems to pick up on so many things from their culture. Rap is one of the most evident examples of this due to the fact that black people, who created rap, have struggled throughout the course of history; with this being said, you can hear rap music being played in any region of the world on a given radio station. And it’s not only rap, it’s the entire culture; clothes, slang, etc. This is a true story: I came across a group of teenagers who were actually arguing about who came from the worst area, in a proud sense. These were all white teens that were trying to be ‘ghetto’ and glorifying that rap culture. In reality, they would probably never want to trade shoes with someone in a less prosperous position. Sun, 28 Jul 2013 19:01:54 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689062323 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689061730 The lecture on multiculturalism was by far one of the most interesting ones this semester. It made me question how much the United States was truly a ‘melting pot’; it became more evident that it is more of a ‘salad bowl’. We’re all mixed up together but the ingredients aren’t quite fully blended. I’ve always been proud of growing up in a diverse area but the lecture made me come to the realization that we weren’t fully integrated. You want to have more of the label of being diverse and politically correct as opposed to actually putting it into practice. The majority group wants to assimilate the minority group and possibly even use that to their advantage; but they will never actually accept that minority group and allow them to be on an equal playing field (only in very rare instances). I also enjoyed the fact that the lecture highlighted how segregated churches actually are; in my opinion, most religions have been the biggest hypocrites in the course of human history. The ‘treat thy neighbor’ notion is only applied in instances when that neighbor is like you and shares the same ideologies. However, they may not accept them or want them to be a part of their church, yet they still would want them to convert. They want them to convert because it only provides more prominence and power for that denomination. I also wanted to make a note on the question regarding whether or not it matters which flag you wave. I feel like it shouldn’t matter at all, if anything, that sense of nationalism and pride only brews conflict. Nationalism and pride in one’s people has given rise to mass exterminations of another type of people. One of the most obvious examples of this was the Holocaust where Hitler was able to convince the majority of the German people to follow his maniacal quest through propaganda and nationalism. Therefore, I don’t think it should be an issue whatsoever and there should be an increased focus on globalization. An interesting thing to mention is the amount a minority group can be cast out but the majority group seems to pick up on so many things from their culture. Rap is one of the most evident examples of this due to the fact that black people, who created rap, have struggled throughout the course of history; with this being said, you can hear rap music being played in any region of the world on a given radio station. And it’s not only rap, it’s the entire culture; clothes, slang, etc. This is a true story: I came across a group of teenagers who were actually arguing about who came from the worst area, in a proud sense. These were all white teens that were trying to be ‘ghetto’ and glorifying that rap culture. In reality, they would probably never want to trade shoes with someone in a less prosperous position. Sun, 28 Jul 2013 19:00:23 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/20/week-seven-lesson-12-multiculturalism/#IDComment689061730 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/15/week-six-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-people-of-color/#IDComment684449978 I failed to mention the point about A Girl Like Me in my blog post but I would have to say that this was also one of the most startling parts of the lecture for me. It made me feel awful to see how these children consciously identified the white dolls as being 'good' as well as identifying themselves as 'bad' for being colored. I grew up in a diverse neighborhood and have friends from a lot of different backgrounds so perhaps I can provide some insight on their reasoning. As mentioned in the lecture, people of color are the 'amphibians' who are aware of both water and land. When you are a minority you are consciously aware of this; they live in a society that constantly puts them down for the most part. After a certain amount of time you essentially develop a notion that 'they' are better. Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:12:15 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/15/week-six-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-people-of-color/#IDComment684449978 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/15/week-six-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-people-of-color/#IDComment684446431 As soon as I saw the title of this week's lecture I immediately understood what the premise of the lecture was going to be. White people when compared to the 'fish' are not aware of water due to the fact that they are submerged in it; people of color are faced to live in two worlds as the 'amphibians' that inherently are able to understand both land and water. These two very simple concepts allow you to grasp what many people seem to have trouble understanding in this present day: how we understand or see race. I thought it was interesting to note that LGBT and disabled people go through similar stages of awareness as colored people; minorities, regardless of what kind, face these kind of stages because they are 'different' than most and they come to understand this concept relatively fast. I thought that the first point made about the pre-awakening stage was very interesting, especially the point made about Asians. The reason I say this is because I have come across many Asians in a similar situation. We have a large population of Asians in my neighborhood; I have noticed that half of them generally identify very strongly with their ancestry while others have fully integrated themselves into what most of us would call 'white' society. Furthermore, I have discussed with some of my Asian friends who have become 'integrated' as to whether or not there was any reasoning behind this (interestingly enough I had a racial awareness project during HS, I chose to interview my Asian friends) and noticed that half of them made a conscious decision to do so while the other half essentially had no idea of what I was talking about. My friends that made a conscious decision said that it was due to the fact that they were either tired of being picked on, that it was easier to move up in the world, and etc. One of the most startling facts during the lecture was the graph indicating the black/Hispanic students who have a higher GPA tend to be less popular meanwhile the opposite effect was the result for the white students; this appears to make it extremely difficult for the colored students to integrate. In addition, colored people in the immersion stage will shun them for trying to 'fit into white culture'. People within the immersion stage can either produce a negative or positive effect; anthological security or hypocrisy. From personal experience I have found that if people don't move through this stage quickly enough they will fall into a level of extremism. Extremist points of view in regards to someone's culture often leads to the idea of supremacy of that culture. This has led to such things as the Holocaust where people were targeted to be exterminated in order to push forward their own race. Sun, 21 Jul 2013 19:01:28 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/15/week-six-lesson-10-stages-of-racial-identity-people-of-color/#IDComment684446431 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-white-people-cont/#IDComment681924456 I happened to also find this to be one of the most interesting topics of the discussion. I also mentioned the constructive versus destructive effects of guilt and believe that it can be viewed on a short-term versus long-term scale. I think that guilt can be used very effectively as an immediate fix, however, it could become destructive over time. I also believe that guilt is more harmful in extreme situations, which is kind of an obvious point. I also feel for your situation, sometimes the worst comes out in all people. Even though he wasn’t right at all, it’s interesting to think about whether or not he could have possibly been in the reversal stage. He may have made a previous effort to come to terms with his guilt for being white but was never fully accepted (Dr. Richards mentioned that sometimes the counterpart can enjoy that sense of guilt). This could have been a possibility for his reaction, regardless of whether or not he was correct. Wed, 17 Jul 2013 23:53:50 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-white-people-cont/#IDComment681924456 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-white-people-cont/#IDComment681919705 The lecture began with somewhat of an extended review of the previous lesson before it dove into the new, interesting topics discussed. One of the comments made by the professor that made an impact on me was actually mentioned at the end. A student, at the end of the lecture, asked if it was a ‘good’ thing to feel guilt; couldn’t this hurt the efforts made up to this point? Sam responded by stating that although a person didn’t need to feel ‘good’ about being guilty, it’s a necessary condition for transitioning through the later stages. I also thought that it was an interesting notion to believe so many things in our society are linked to guilt; all the way from the Bible to parenting techniques. Despite this being true, its effectiveness can be questionable. As a short-term technique I find that it can be very effective; which is why it has probably stood the test of time. However, on a long-term scale, I think that this can become harmful and has been in extreme situations. The stage that led up to this ‘White Guilt’ (stage 3) was also very interesting. From personal experience, I have noticed that there are two specific age groups that I have felt identified with this stage: college students and middle-aged adults. This is just a generalization, of course, but I will explain my logic. College students are exposed to a lot more diversity and new thoughts at this time, which explains why they may eventually become guilty for their ‘whiteness’ due to their newfound awareness. In addition, I feel that many middle-aged people go through this phase because of coming to a new understanding in life as a result of experience. This thought can also be seen from the completely opposite spectrum as well; some may come to justify their advantages of being white. The aforementioned thought is what eventually leads to stage four; a discomfort of all this guilt can lead to a regression in behavior, as discussed. Coming from a very diverse neighborhood, I have seen several variations of these possibilities. What I mean by this is already what we have established: either white people become aware and have a sense of guilt or they eventually regress into old patterns. I have noticed that when white people are more ‘accepted’ by their colored counterparts after their newfound guilt (which comes off as apologetic) they are less likely to regress into old patterns. This raises an interesting question; is reversal a necessary condition for progressing further throughout the stages? This can be compared to the necessary condition of guilt that we found in stage three. I am eager to hear about the further progression of the stages as well as your thoughts. Wed, 17 Jul 2013 23:40:39 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-9-stages-of-racial-identity-white-people-cont/#IDComment681919705 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-8-stages-of-racial-idenity-white-people/#IDComment680054835 I like the point that you mentioned about it being difficult at times to discuss ‘whiteness’ due to having a lack of experience with it. I know there have been times in my life where it has been difficult to bring up. I have many friends at home from different backgrounds and I notice that we tend to stay away from speaking about certain topics or that I am very politically correct when I am around them. To be quite frank, sometimes white people will ‘joke’ and throw around the N word when they’re with each other; however, the situation is completely changed with simply one colored person entering the room. I also wanted to mention, that even though your high school didn’t have too many people from other races, the situation is strikingly similar even in places where people have a lot of exposure to these kinds of issues. Mon, 15 Jul 2013 01:35:15 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-8-stages-of-racial-idenity-white-people/#IDComment680054835 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-8-stages-of-racial-idenity-white-people/#IDComment680050750 Even though I was aware of many of the issues presented by Sam, he was able to shed light on some of those issues in more detail. Despite the fact that the lecture focuses on race, the comment on our realization (or non-realization) of most of us being ‘straight’ put the majority-minority relations into a different perspective. Some of things discussed hit close to home; I think that the awareness of majority-minority relations really affected my mother when she first immigrated to America from Russia. There was, unquestionably, a multitude of race issues in the former Soviet Union. However, most Russians never had to identify themselves as ‘white’ they were simply considered ‘Soviets’ or ‘Russians’. The awareness of race, especially being white, really came to the forefront for her when she arrived here. I found that the explanation on racial identity stages was really interesting. Firstly, I wasn’t aware that a person can move forward in their realization or awareness, but are able to regress to previous stages. Furthermore, it was also interesting to find out that you can be in multiple stages at the same time. Lastly, I thought it was a provocative, yet true statement on the fact that most white people never reach the last stage; the majority always has a difficulty of understanding itself. We haven’t discussed the other stages for white people; however, I feel that the majority of college students are deep in the second stage and possibly the beginning of the third by the time they graduate. Most of us have a strong opinion on where we stand with race regardless of whether we want to talk about it or not. The ones that tend to shy away from the issue generally focus on just being politically correct; they want to avoid offending someone at all costs. The others in this stage are either really for, or against the equality of the races; some white people become ‘crusaders’ of the cause while others essentially become racists, for lack of a better word. Something tells me that minorities or colored people are able to move through the stages much faster than white people due to the fact that they naturally have to deal with being a minority. In other words, they are aware of minority issues because they are the minorities. It will also be interesting to see if the stages will vary as well, especially in the early stages. The fact that we become aware differently and at different times can clearly give rise to tension; the example of the Mexican waitress becoming offended by the white person’s gesture of attempting to speak Spanish illustrated this well. Overall, I thought it was a fascinating topic and am eager to learn more about the stages for white people, as well as colored people. Mon, 15 Jul 2013 01:24:23 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/07/07/week-five-lesson-8-stages-of-racial-idenity-white-people/#IDComment680050750 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/30/week-four-lesson-6-race-ethnic-inequality/#IDComment675278843 I thought the question you posed about whether or not the 'ancestors of white people' would have made the same decision if they saw the consequences. Something tells me that many people still would have made that decision due to the logic that you want to excel and, inherently, want those around you (or those like you) to excel as well. I also found his clarification on the difference between a conservative and a liberal to be very refreshing, especially the example the he posed with gay rights. Based on this view, many of the republicans don't even realize how liberal they are by allowing the government to interfere with such issues. Sun, 7 Jul 2013 17:58:56 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/30/week-four-lesson-6-race-ethnic-inequality/#IDComment675278843 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/30/week-four-lesson-6-race-ethnic-inequality/#IDComment675276823 I felt that last week's lecture went hand in hand with the lecture on racial and ethnic inequality. Even though we're free to make the choices that shape our lives, there are outside forces that will affect us as well'; 'invisible strings'. The place where you're born or the fact of who your ancestors are plays a major role in shaping the outcome of your life. For example, let's say a child is born in an isolated, rural area in India and happens to be born with the highest IQ in the world; due to where he is, he may never receive the exposure he needs to fulfill his potential. Even with all his effort he may never be able to overcome this obstacle; these are outside forces that are completely out of his control that are affecting him directly. I used to compete nationally in tennis and have met many talented players that even went on to play professionally; however, some of the best players I've come across would be from the inner-city. They would all have outdated equipment and limited training from their amateur coaches who more than often were their parents. They were often times a lot better than the well-prepared athletes from the suburbs but would never receive the proper exposure for anyone to find out about them. Often times their best case scenario would be to play for a college team; but many of their white counterparts were able to receive the training and funding to go play professionally. I thought that the 'king of the mountain' metaphor was extremely interesting and could be an explanation as to why society is shaped as it is around racial/ethnic issues. For some reason, certain type of people were more predisposed to being more aggressive and wanting to take over. This led to prosperity for that given people because you are generally inclined to helping out your own. This method of thinking has taken a new form in the modern century (despite race and ethnicity still being prevalent); it's called networking. The people you know will affect the outcome of how your life turns out as well as the generations that follow you. I also thought that some of the statistics on drug use and incarceration were astounding. It made it almost blatantly obvious that blacks were being racially profiled by the police. One of the most interesting facts was actually brought up by a student at the end of the lecture; they mentioned that 5000 grams of powder form cocaine warrants the same punishment as only 50 grams of crack/cocaine. The crystallized form of cocaine is much more prevalent in inner-city neighborhoods; how can the government say that this isn't racially influenced? Sun, 7 Jul 2013 17:52:15 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/30/week-four-lesson-6-race-ethnic-inequality/#IDComment675276823 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/23/week-three-lesson-5-social-inequality/#IDComment672430068 I have to completely agree with the first statement you made. It's extremely hard to make it through college, let alone get into college when you're from a lower income family. For people in upper-class families a higher education is seen as being a necessity while in lower or middle class families it turns into being a luxury of some sort. Another thing I noticed, lower-income families are only able to look at things in the short-term as opposed to the long-term because that's all they can afford; long-term investments seem out of sight and unreasonable. Tue, 2 Jul 2013 23:59:01 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/23/week-three-lesson-5-social-inequality/#IDComment672430068 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/23/week-three-lesson-5-social-inequality/#IDComment672427609 This lecture was really great because it allowed you to see things from various perspectives of different social classes. Many people in disadvantaged positions feel that they are bound to it because of their surroundings; however, they do have the choice to work hard to overcome those obstacles. Even though this is true, some of the obstacles that they face may make it increasingly difficult to overcome their situation. Education is another extremely important factor; studies show that wealthier people tend to receive much better educations which grant them a multitude of opportunities. There are those that are less fortunate who have to struggle to obtain a higher education with some not managing to obtain a degree at all. Most of the time this affects how much income they will earn over a life time with highly educated people averaging much higher income. Despite this, we still hear about the success stories who manage to rise above all obstacles to make it to the 'pinnacle' of society. One of my favorite success stories happens to be a rapper's success story; Jay-Z. He grew up in one of the most dangerous housing projects in America at the time and selling drugs to support himself. He eventually became committed to music and becoming the best lyricist possible; at night he would stay up in order to study the dictionary to learn new words to incorporate into his songs. I'm not sure if he even managed to graduate from High School, but he went on to become one of the most successful and influential entrepreneurs of his time. This kind of goes back to the freedom v. determinism part of the lecture and it shows that an individual has the ability to succeed despite there being obstacles; however, as we all know, not everyone is equal in their abilities, unfortunately. Looking at it from a personal perspective; I know that all of these factors play a role. There was a time where my mom was well off and was able to grant me many opportunities during those years such as a private school education. Circumstances led to her essentially losing everything which left me in a position where I had to help support the family as well as figuring out a way to put myself through college. Despite having these new obstacles, I believe it is somewhat a matter of choice as to where you end up. However, if I wasn't provided with the opportunities prior to this situation, I may have not ended up in the situation I am in. At the same time, it made me have a different outlook on life in addition to becoming much more determined. Tue, 2 Jul 2013 23:52:49 +0000 http://www.soc119.org/2013/06/23/week-three-lesson-5-social-inequality/#IDComment672427609