When someone says "illegal immigrant," they imagine a stereotypical lazy Mexican who lives with twenty other people in a low-income apartment and can't speak English or say the Pledge of Allegiance. I'm from a suburb outside of Pittsburgh, and this is how the majority of illegal Mexican immigrants are. One of my good friends from elementary school was illegal, and lived in a house with 32 of his relatives. His mom worked at a laundromat and his dad did construction work for local companies. His family saved every penny to afford to send him to a private school for the best education. Now he's at UPenn for pre-med. What people don't see, however, is what we did in class. People on the street starving and waiting for work, when they know there probably will be done. They come to America to live the "American Dream," to prosper on their own. Unfortunately, for many illegal immigrants, they come here still poor and stuck in low income work. Sure, they work for lower wages, but their existence dampers our economy, which is the primary reason so many people oppose them. Because illegal immigrants will work for lower wages, Americans in the same jobs are out of work. Would a company want to pay union wages when they can pay people to do the same (if not better) job? Obviously not. Companies see illegal immigrants as a very useful tool to save money. The majority of America, however, are working people, and feel threatened by the idea of people who don't have citizenship are taking over their jobs.
Another reason people dislike illegal immigrants is because of the associated crime they commit while in this country. Although many white people commit crimes, you don't normally hear about them nearly as much as when an illegal immigrant does something wrong. I normally hear a lot of stories about Mexicans and drug busts, but the main reason they probably deal drugs is because their job does not offer sustainable pay.
Many immigrants from Asia reside in my hometown. Many, however, own their shops and restaurants around the area. My favorite Korean grocery store is owned by an illegal immigrant, but she is doing very well for herself by making an honest, well-earned living. There are many Asian immigrants who live in the slums and poor conditions, but most people perceive Asians as smart and business-savvy, so a lot of people don't question their livelihoods and citizenship nearly as much as the Mexicans in my area.
People are ignorant and uneducated about illegal immigration. Many American workers feel that illegal immigrants are taking their jobs and ruining our economy, when they are doing jobs others are not willing to do. I believe there should be stricter documentation on illegal immigrants, but I definitely don't mind my Korean store lady making me more Kim Chi - can't wait to go back to Pittsburgh!

Current Indian life is never discussed in its entirety. I'm sure people know the basics of the history of the Indian genocide in the expansion of America: they were driven west, killed, or forced to live on reservations. What we don't know, however, is how the white's way of entrapment and annihilation from centuries ago made today's Indian continue to live in such impoverished conditions. Most people don't see the side of Indian life. From what I've been reading in these blogs, it definitely seems that way. It's a sad history that has led to a sad present and future of these people. When I saw the video of the Lakota Sioux living in such extreme poverty and an 80% unemployment rate, I wasn't surprised. I was really surprised to see the song "Blood in the Water" in line with the lecture. I love that song and didn't make the connection, probably because I just wasn't thinking about it. But the lead singer of Dave Matthew's band is south African, so he may have a personal history tied in with oppression from the white man.
I am of Indian decent and am very well off compared to other Indians. It's from my mom's side of the family, however, which has a history of being less wealthy than my dad's side. Is this coincidental, or because of the Indian heritage? It's really hard to say.
I was, however, wanting more information on what we as students can do to help lessen the suppression of these people. I know we are helping others such as Haitians, but I think it's crazy that we aren't helping our people in our country, as the one guy said in the video we watched. With many people committing suicide and engaging in alcoholism, people can provide counseling or help centers for these people. We look at other people white men have oppressed in the history of this country, but we always get slapped on the hand if we mention anything bad about them. If a white person calls a black person a racist name, it's like the world would end. if someone called an Indian a "redskin," what would happen? Someone could probably cheer because it's their favorite baseball team. My high school mascot was a "Red Raider," an Indian. Our area is full of Indian culture, so people embraced it with pride. However, my art teacher threw frenzies about the mascot being used. Once class, she asked me how I would feel as a Catholic to see our cheerleaders in skanky nun outfits throwing crucifixes around.
Overall, I left the lecture feeling awful and like I should've went outside and performed a rain dance. I don't mean that to be racist, but obviously, I felt like I should've done something to try and make up for what happened. But what could I have done anyway?

I don’t like pictures of children being used in foreign aid programs. Obviously, it’s a marketing tool to make people feel bad and donate money to a cause. It is sad to see certain children in that state of poverty, but as Ernso said, agencies are only interested in showing the worst of the worst and the poorest of the poorest. When people begin to figure that out, they’ll feel less inclined to donate their money. In addition, people will get a poor impression of the places where the agencies are trying to get money for. As with Haiti, people are being shown all of the horrible mess and poverty that’s there. While Haiti is the poorest country in the western world, the people who live in Haiti are proud and becoming continuingly independent with their businesses. The land is beautiful, and there is a lot of potential for tourism and economic development. With the images of poor impoverished children in poverty-stricken communities, people will probably chose not to go to Haiti to vacation because, normally, poor countries are associated with high rates of crime, especially by children.
When Ernso showed us pictures of children smiling and going to school, it brought a whole new perspective on how children live in Haiti. After hearing about the earthquake, I assumed the same as I mentioned above; that Haiti was just a poverty-stricken, crime-infested country that has no hope for regrowth. If I thought that way, I can’t imagine how other people think about Haiti. When people assume that poor places are hopeless, they think to donate and then wonder where they money would actually go. Does it go to a reliable agency, or will it just go to a corrupt government and its continuing pool of poverty? Do children really combat that thinking?
From a marketing standpoint, using children is ideal. Guilt is a very powerful motivator, and easing that guilt by sending to those less fortunate probably makes a lot of people feel better knowing they helped that poor, starving child. How is this considered ethical? I'm not sure if I'd go out on a limb here saying that exploiting children in a third world country for the sake of a few dollars can be considered ethical. I am all for helping those less fortunate than me, but I can do that on my own accord; I don't need to be sent on a guilt trip and try to remedy that guilt because of an infomercial. True, if marketers would only focus on the good, people wouldn't lend a hand to Haiti; they would visit and want to explore there.
I understand the reason of using, sorry, exploiting children to get more money, but don't fall victim to the guilt. As Ernso said, the Haitians are proud people who are trying to make an honest living, not ask for anything from anyone.

I always love getting on the inside of the male perspective.
As I woman, I already know how my gender operates. Mainly, women are catty, jealous bitches who try to outdo other women by falling to pressures of society. Even when girls tromp around in their SAME EXACT outfits of leggings, UGGs, and Northface zip-ups, they are always judging each other. I have a lot more guy friends for this reason, but at the same time, I always wonder about the male perspective. What really makes a man operate? Sure, most would say sex, alcohol, and money, but from my experience, men are deeper than that; they're just conditioned not to show it. So what really is the "male perspective?" Magazines tell me to dress this way, try this sex position, and act this way to be "instantly attractive." Is this perspective of sex appeal based on the media, porn, or biology?
My ex-boyfriend Sora was raised only by his father because his mother passed away when he was a baby. Because he had such a strong male influence in his life, Sora was different than any other guy I met. He always did such "man things." He always left the toilet seat up, said very dumb things, and had what I considered an addiction to porn. But those things were so normal to him because his father raised him to be "as manly" as he could be. I was raised around very sophisticated women- I was even sent to etiquette school! So obviously when I start dating Sora, I didn't know what to do with myself. When I confided in my friends, they would assure me that he was "just being a guy." But why, I always wondered, are men the way they are? I always asked him why he was "that way," and he just said it was what he was used to. Porn was always an enormous issue, and ultimately brought our relationship to an end because I couldn't understand the appeal. My sister told me I was a prude and being crazy for stifling his sexual interests, but not all men are porn-addicted weirdos!
For my research on the male perspective, I don't take "oh, he's just a guy" for an answer to anything. If the way a man is goes back to their DNA, I can accept that. But the influence of the media and porn are not sufficient enough for me to fall for the "he' s just a guy" argument. I know men and women are different in the way they respond to sex, but the lecture made me realize that I was putting a lot of emphasis on the differences whenever I really didn't need to. It's always interesting to get the perspective from someone who has a lot of experience like Same and Laurie, and I hope I can find a guy who can see past the influence of porn and the media, and be real with me.

First off, I’m a while girl. Trying to explain the nature of any man is a challenge within itself . . .
I asked my very white friend Josh if he would ever date a black girl. He laughed at me for about five minutes and then said no. Before I could ask why, he blurted out, “I’m not soul enough to handle a soul sista!” He calmed down and explained his reasoning to me. First off, he did admit Beyoncé is insanely hot, but because she’s a “caramel,” not black. In our hometown, a lot of the black people are very dark and stereotypical gangster/ghetto. All of the bomb and weapon threats that happened throughout my high school career were given by black kids who just wanted to get suspended from school for a few days. To us, many black kids were the drug-abusing, troublemaking headaches of society. In addition, no black people were in any of the honors, AP, or college-level courses with Josh and me. “Dating someone who has the same hunger for education is really important to me,” Josh explained, “so if she’s not even bright enough to get into the higher classes, forget it!” Also, Josh said he wasn’t physically attracted to the “black girl physique.” With enormous lips, hips, and thighs, and kinked hair, it can be a little intimidating, he claimed. He likes girls “proportional” like Victoria Secret models. Without the initial physical attraction, Josh claimed, it’s hard for anyone to go after someone. As shallow as it sounds, I think he’s right. It is best to give someone a chance and get to know them, but it may take some self-convincing.
In my perspective, white guys don’t date black girls based on their experiences and influence in their community. Josh and I went to high school where a majority of black kids were juvenile and uneducated, which is not attractive to him. We also come from a pretty racist area in Pennsylvania, which plays a huge part. I can’t remember ever seeing an interracial couple in high school. I’m sure if Josh starting dating a black girl, his friends and family would be angry and disapproving. Maybe white guys don’t want to start dating black girls because you know what happens when you go black – you can’t go back! But seriously, dating outside of your race can be new and scary for a lot of people. Guys are probably afraid of being judged harshly. Having the hottest girlfriend is a competition among some group of guys, and if many don’t find the black girls attractive, that guy would obviously lose! A lot of why guys aren’t able to date outside of their race is mostly external influence, which in turn causes internal decisions.

As far as I can remember, I have never felt guilty about my race. As a white woman, I embrace the certain privilege I’m granted by society. Strangers say hello, hold doors open for me, and offer me compliments on my outfit or hairstyle for the day. Unfortunately, I seldom see the same treatment offered to a woman of color. While I do not feel guilty about my race, I feel sorry for those of other races who obviously have it rougher than me, both socially- and economically-speaking. Before this class, I never thought being white was an advantage. I never thought about race much until my years in high school when I went from an all-white Catholic middle school to a very diverse high school. As a child, I picked out a black baby doll to play with. My dad, the racist guy that he is, tried to tell me that I was wrong in choosing the black doll, and that I should embrace my whiteness because “all black people want to be just like you.” At that point, I did not feel like I was better than anyone else; I felt upset remorse for others who were put down for something that was completely out of their control. Why did someone have to feel guilty for how God made them? I did not understand. One of my best friends growing up was half black, half white. I never thought anything was wrong with her, or that I was better than she was. Nor did I ever feel guilty that she wasn’t like me.
I do not think people should ever feel guilty about their race. The political correctness and discrimination of race makes people feel guilt about what they were born into, so if we want the racial differences to stop, people need to learn how to embrace what they were born with and stop being so sensitive. I grew up believing that guilt and regret are wastes of emotion, and I wish other people would believe that too. Without guilt and the fear of walking on eggshells, we could move ahead with understanding and accepting others for who they are. Race has never been an issue to me, but as time goes on in this class, I begin to realize that people feel upset with who they are. As we watched yesterday with the children and the baby dolls, we are taught at a young age that there is a difference between races. Black children in particular are taught that being white is “good” and “nice,” which was really disturbing to me. To teach children at such a young age that white is better makes black and brown children feel that guilt, which takes a lot to get rid of. I have never felt guilty about my race personally, but I can’t imagine how others would feel after being given an inferiority complex at such a young age.

Frankly, in much agreement with what someone else posted, this question is not a very good one (or just really stupid).
First of all, everyone needs to understand one VERY important thing: affirmative action is NOT a quota system; it does not mean that a minority gets a job over a white person because companies need to get a certain number of “people” in their company, which many believe is the case. The premise of affirmative action is to equal the playing field for EQUALLY-QUALIFED applicants, not saying “Oh look, he’s black—let’s totally hire him so we make ourselves look good!” I really wish people would understand what affirmative action is before they go on saying they support it or don’t support it, or they don’t know which way to go. Take time to figure it out and get educated on this issue, because believe it or not, affirmative action will have a control on you whenever you apply for jobs.
As a white female, many people believe I support affirmative action because as a woman, I am considered a workplace minority. However, I am not in support of affirmative action because it should not matter if it exists or not. Despite any job, the hiring person is training to select the best applicant for the job. And think about it: would someone deny a stellar doctor because he was black instead of hiring a mediocre, barely-made-it-out-of-med-school white guy? For the sake of the patients, hospital funding, and livelihood of the hospital, it will not matter! True, discrimination still exists, there is no denying that. However, there are laws in place (Title VII, for example) that would get the EEOC on companies’ butts really fast if actual discrimination took place. To put this simply, affirmative action is not needed because of the entire set jurisdiction that has been put into place to protect people in protected classes (race being one of them).
How can affirmative action be taken so far when its purpose is to create an equal-playing field for everyone? Are you suggesting this isn’t fair? Talk about latent white privilege! While I agree with a previous poster that this question is dumb, I will not agree with some of his other statements, like white people are becoming jealous of black people. In terms of the scholarships, however, these things are happening because he is right, that black people will continue to be at a disadvantage. Do I believe affirmative action will remedy that disadvantage? Probably not, but we all need to be the best people we can be, which is why affirmative action makes no sense because in the real world, the recruiter will hire the best person for the job. And if they don’t, hey, why would you want to work for that discriminating sucker anyway? People just always want something to complain about.

I wouldn't agree that low income families who have a lot of children are selfish, but more so irresponsible and uneducated about birth control options. I understand the human urge to reproduce, but seriously, if families can barely get by, they need to get birth control of some sort. A lot of children seem to be trended in low income families, I believe, because sex is free! I had a friend in high school who lived in poverty and had 13 brothers and sisters, and he said his parents had sex all of the time because they could not afford to do anything or go anywhere. Being uneducated about sex is not a good enough excuse for me, but that's because I have had sexual education courses all throughout my private Catholic schooling career (believe it or not). Mothers and fathers may age who went to public schools, however, may not have had the same options as I did. Is being sexually uneducated still a reasonable excuse? Don't think so. If you have a baby once, you know why it happens, so why do it again and further put yourself and your CHILD into a financial hole? The parents would have to work harder and balance their family life, which is very hard for a lot of people to do. For those who have nothing else better to do than have lots of unprotected sex, run down to a health clinic, college campus, or gynecologist and get condoms.
HOWEVER, families on WELFARE who have lots of children ARE selfish. More kids equals a higher check, so why not milk the system and get as much out of the government as you can? I have a lot of disdain for those who abuse welfare. In my high school, 54 percent of students were on welfare. On average, the kids on welfare were one of six or seven children. With the money the parents could have spent on obtaining birth control options, many of them bought drugs and alcohol, and sat around their house dealing drugs. If someone can just do something as enjoyable as sex and then kick back with drugs and alcohol while their kids run wild, why not? For many people in that town, that's what life was. Many kids ran in the streets, creating gangs and causing all sorts of trouble. Why? Lazy parents who want higher checks! People may consider me close-minded, but I have heard personal accounts from kids who said their parents are just having more kids for more money. A majority of those infants grow up in a home where they believe it's all right to live this way, like their selfish welfare-bumming parents. Parents have the money to properly educate themselves and their children about birth control, but why bother when you have the best life just kicking back being high and sexual all of the time? Selfish.

In my LER 458Y class, we talked about slavery in the 1880s. When compared to the slavery today, everyone was fully aware that slavery still exists. Someone in my class even said, “I like the little kids in the slave mills. Their hands are small enough to do the detailed stitching on my shoes and sweaters!” Although he meant the comment in jest, everyone was so disgusted with him. Obviously, people are aware of the child slavery in sweatshops overseas. However, lots of people probably are not aware of the type of slavery we saw in class yesterday; I know I wasn’t!
For us, it’s easy for us to become educated about the issues of modern day slavery while in SOC 119. However, spreading awareness among the public would be much more difficult. The best way to reach people seems to be through television commercials and public demonstrations. However, despite already common sweatshop knowledge and publicized scandals like Nike, people continue to buy and ultimately support the business. Like Ryan mentioned in class, he would still go out and spent $15 instead of $30 for the same item because he has to watch out for him. Although I would feel guilty (and no, I did not eat my second piece of chocolate), I would reluctantly buy the cheaper item because my $15 needs to go to another finance like my rent or piles of other bills that I owe each other.
Is advertising and spreading awareness really an issue that could change something? Penn State has the Student Against Sweatshops club that has gotten a clothes line, Alta Garcia, in the Penn State Bookstore. Even with signs and testimonials of workers in these factories are all over the windows of the bookstore, the free trade clothing line is one of the lower sellers while Nike shirts fly off of the shelves. We can educate, but does it really matter if people are only looking out for themselves and their wallets?
The best way to educate people would be to have people see what really goes on. But even then, would it really make a difference? After class, I went to Walmart and did my grocery shopping. If fair trade items were cheaper and finer quality than slave-made goods, people would pay attention—but pay attention for the wrong reason. In this dog-eat-dog world, it’s survival of the fittest. In this economy, a lot of people have to stretch their dollars thin. I know I do, along with many other people like me. I do have the knowledge of slavery, but I get what’s cheap. The world is about money, which a lot of college students in particular don’t have. Some people are informally educated and aware of these things, but is there a better way to get the message through to people? The answer will always be, in my opinion, money.

I grew up in West Lafayette, Indiana. I spent most of my time with my grandparents because my parents were always working or doing their own thing. My dad was transferred to Pittsburgh when I was 6, and then my parents divorced when we got here. After the custody battle, it was settled that my sister and I would live with our dad. He was never around, but put us with a babysitter, in a private school, and an activity to do every day of the week. We hated those activities and the control he had over us. When he was around, he always reminded me how I would never be smart enough or good enough. It was his way to motivate me to do better, but even after expressing to him it was ineffective, it continued. It began to take a serious toll. I was depressed, angry, and alone without any guidance. Because of the overwhelming anxiety and animosity, when I was in seventh grade, I began smoking weed and cigarettes, drinking, and thinking about sex. At that point, I thought I found my fix. The friends and parental guidance I didn’t have didn’t matter anymore. At the end of that year, my sister and I decided to move in with our mom an hour away in Uniontown. It was a complete culture shock. It was my first time attending a public school, and I learned that I was ignorant to what serious drugs and reckless behavior was. When I moved there, I met friends who were a lot like me; they were brilliant and poetic, but unlike me, they were vowed as straightedge (no drinking, smoking, or unprotected sex). Among them, I found a solace I’d never felt in my life. I gave up drinking and smoking, and turned over a new life because of those people. I definitely believe it was the will of God that I found these friends, but it was my will to give up my reckless behavior that I could find myself and figure out where I wanted to go in life. I began to study and focus on academics, and knew I needed to go to college. My dad made it a point for me to go to college, but I never knew what I wanted to study. I’ve changed my mind on my future career goal numerous times, but have decided that I want to go to law school.
I grew up Catholic, being told that God set forth plans for our lives, but it was up to us to exercise our free will to make the best decisions for ourselves. At first, I thought this sounded contradictory; much like the saying “God only helps those who help themselves.” How could I be set on where to go yet make decisions? How could God have mapped out every possible decision I would ever make in my life? In my young rebellion, I was set on the notion that I made my own damn decisions and did what I wanted to do. With all of the revelations and important people who have come into my life, it was almost like God was trying to push me back on the right path. I do believe in a combination of both, because I do things that are unsaintly but in better judgment.