I was very interested to see this entry on the blog; I think it may be the most thought-provoking one of the semester. "Lifers" are a group of people in this world who I have always regarded with the darkest, most condescending thoughts. I have always viewed them as the animals; the no-good people who are bound by the concrete walls and stay the same as they were when they entered the prison. This prisoner acknowledges that while there are some of those men and women to be found in a prison, especially among the 'lifers', there are exceptions to that stereotype. Really, when you think about it, it is just another stereotype we place on people just as we would if they fit into any other stereotypical category. What's interesting, though, is that these men and women are convicted criminals. Guilty of the most inhumane crimes, yet they still show the most human traits. It was so interesting to read this prisoner's account for a number of reasons. First, I would like to comment on the fact that Sam mentioned he never graduated from high school. If this is true, WOW. This prisoner has obviously delved into some reading while behind bars. His thoughts were so well formed, and his words were picked perfectly to relay his experiences. For someone who never graduated, he definitely surpasses that stereotype in the intelligence that is displayed through his letter. Second, I was surprised to see how analytical he was about the acts of compassion shown in a prison. Most people living their normal, day to day lives outside the constraints of a prison would never, ever think even half as much about the acts of compassion and human suffering that this life prisoner has. I always figured that prisoners think a lot about every single thing there is to analyze and think about in this world, but I also thought at the same time that their basic make up as a human becomes skewed and therefore makes their analysis and thought process off par from those of 'normal' people. But this prisoners letter defied all of those preconceived notions of mine. He shows such basic, common human thoughts, but develops them, recognizes them, and puts meaning and value to them in ways that people not in prison never engage in. Third, this account really makes me feel a great deal of sympathy towards this prisoner. Here is an individual who instead of going 'crazy' and becoming an unrecognizable monster of a human being in order to cope with the unsightly fact that the rest of his time in this world will be spent in a cell block, he has evolved as a person. He has obviously increased his knowledge, developed his thought processes, and taken a stock on the world around him, valuing those traits he is able to observe inside of what he is able to call his home. I truly think that even though he committed an unthinkable crime, this individual shows the ability to be a productive member of society. His thoughts show his compassion and understanding, and those are two things that I personally don't think can be fabricated as qualities in a person. It's unfortunate that he will never see the outside of a prison, but at the same time, that is our judicial system and he did at one point take someone else's life. It just really opens your eyes to the potential that lies inside of even the most discounted members of our society. This post has showed me how much I have to learn from everyone in this world, even those who I have previously deemed unworthy of a last breath, such as the 'lifers' like the unique individual who wrote this letter. My view has definitely been broadened thanks to this post.

Like everyone else who has responded before me, I'm going to start off by saying how absolutely disgusted I am by this Japanese video game. It is ridiculous that this is a part of their culture... what else is hiding from the media's attention?? Now, I also agree that shoot-em-up games are wrong and disgusting too, but I watch my younger brother play them and in a sick way, they have become a 'normal' and accepted part of our culture. I'm not saying that those games probably haven't been the cause of several instances of violence in real life, but they are more common-place. Guns are legal, raping is not. Could you imagine your brother/dad/boyfriend playing a video game where the goal is to rape the cartoon character woman?? There is just something insanely perverse about that. What is that telling society? It definitely delivers a different message than we deliver in the U.S. Games centered on rape I feel open up the topic of rape and make it seem like a more integrated, normal party of daily life. I would love to see if Japan's rape rate has risen since this game has gained media attention...I'm willing to bet money that it has. Broadcasting a game such as this one only sets society up for more misdemeanors. People can be very dumb about blurring the lines between what's entertainment and what's acceptable behavior. A rape game I feel only helps to blur that line even more. I bet that there are tons more where that game came from, and it's scary to think that there are probably illegal versions of it in our very own country. So who is using their Xbox for NFL Madden 2010 and who's using it to practice and perfect the art of raping??! It's crazy to think that people are actually doing this in Japan; I wouldn't discount this as just a problem of Japan's culture, though. I'm sure that the same disgusting game exists somewhere in the U.S. It might only be a matter of time until the media sheds a light on a deeper secret of Japan's society or a shocking one in our own society.

As the media has brought thing upon thing to light in recent years, I feel that each 'thing' becomes more shocking than the last. It seems to be a pattern that has formed. It's almost to say that there's nothing that can't be expected. Does the raping game come with a companion game that helps people master their kidnapping skills?! I mean, it probably does. On the shelf right next to the game about plotting the perfect murder, I'm sure. Or why don't we make a game about sexually assaulting children? Doesn't seem to far fetched in the scheme of events that the media continues to unfold, one after another. I feel as though we as a society are always shocked and disgusted to hear about things such as this, but in reality, we aren't all that shocked. It's just another crazy story the media was able to dig up, and there are definitely many more where it came from.

s was definitely the most controversial topic brought up by Sam so far, well, at least the topic that stirred the most discussion and had the class most visibly upset. I think it is very clear why he brought up the topic of menstruating the way he did; he wanted to pull these emotions out of us, he wanted us to get into deeper discussion about the social implications around menstruating than we normally delve into. Mission accomplished, Sam.

I can't say that I agree with the casualness in which he disclosed his wife's cycle and her tribulations associated with it, but that's not my argument to pick. If she's cool with that, then fine. I certainly would NOT be. Now, that isn't because I'm uncomfortable talking about my period or embarrassed of it by any means; it's a fact of life, something that has to happen and is a great thing as it allows us to one day start our own families. Rather, I guess I am one of the people who have learned to hide all of the frustrations, emotions, and pain that go along with the 28 day cycle I and every other woman on this planet experience.

When girls first get their periods, they are typically in middle school. I remember that part of my life as plain confusing. You are trying to fit in, trying to make friends, figuring out your own self. Then you get your period, and the last thing your going to do is share that fact with the new guy friends you've made; they're so immature they still laugh when someone makes a farting sound. Welcome to middle school; welcome to guys in general, I guess. It may be a male-dominated world, I completely agree that it is. And yes, I am 'that girl' who wants my husband to be smarter than I am and earn a higher salary than I do. It's just how I see the world. But, I also have always felt that guys, no matter what age, are less mature than their female counterparts. We women may not take the upper hand in society, but we are always more mature, and I think that dealing with something like our periods helps to make us this way.

We have to give ourselves to the mercy of 'Aunt Flo' once a month, unless you lucked out and got prescribed the birth control that keeps your period down to a maximum of 3 cycles per year. I'm jealous! But we give our emotions away the second we realize our tears are flowing over some stupid incident because, hello, PMS has arrived. Then we give our bodies away for a week to the pains that feel like someone kicking you in the lower back. We give up our own schedules to fit in frequent bathroom trips. We give up time getting ready to make sure our purses are stocked with tampons. And all of these things, all of these super annoying, trying things, are not experienced by men. Ever. In any way, shape, or form.

That is the exact reason why I am not as open about 'bleeding' as Sam suggests we all should be. Men don't experience it, so it makes it hard to throw out there like complaining about a hangnail or a bruise on your leg. Men are immature because they don't give themselves to menstruation once a month. Men should respect us for what we go through, and be considerate of our periods, not grossed out by them. But we shouldn't be expected to carelessly discuss menstruation; it's a private struggle that is almost always better dealt with when kept between us girls.

This is a very interesting and controversial topic that was posed to our class. I feel that this is a real issue, and that it is slightly tilted towards one group. More often than not, I observe black students getting away with jokes, sarcastic or not, about white students. Whether they are making a remark in a casual conversation or actually presenting an idea to the class, I feel that I have witnessed on several accounts black students being able to stereotypically make fun of white students without feeling any effects. In fact, most of the time the white students laugh along with them, because many stereotypes are very well known and generally accepted as something that will always be around by all people. However, I can only remember instances in which I heard a white student cracking the same type of joke towards a black student and seeing the end result of a fired response or the black student becoming offended.

First of all, I don't support making jokes between, against or about blacks and whites. There is no need for it. But it does exist in our society, and mostly on a sarcastic level, thank god. Typically, I see that white students are very conscientious of what they say about racial matters. They don't want to say anything 'wrong' or 'offensive'. Black students, on the otherhand, seem to expect the racial equality white students have in the fore front of their minds but don't mind discussing it openly or saying something demeaning about white students or about white students being racist. Think of a white student who is in the minority in a high school; they are definitely the ones experiencing the racial minority, not the black students. It shouldn't be a universal attitude that whites should be careful and not say anything offensive and blacks should expect no mention of racial difference from whites but be free to say whatever they feel on the topic. This, I feel, only worsens the racial inequality that exists in some parts of our society still today.

We would all know we were comfortable with our racial differences, in my eyes, when they day comes that both blacks and whites, and any other race for that matter, are able to make light jokes about each other without any hard feelings or negative connotations attached. Or better yet, the day that racial differences are so obscure that jokes about such a thing would be pointless.

I feel that there are still a great deal of both blacks and whites that are wrongly harsh and insensitive to races other than their own. It is a sad thing to see in our society today, but as evidenced by many of the rude comments that flooded the screen in class this week, it still happens. It seemed that white people were more timid to say anything bold, but black people had few inhibitions. Maybe black people are more comfortable with racial differences than white people and therefore speak more easily and freely about it? I'm not sure of the reason, but I do know that racial differences still make many instances in our class very tense, when I feel that they shouldn't do that at all.

I don't agree with this pattern found within ABC's repetoire of shows at all. Today's world may not be as racially equal as everyone would like it to be, but at least make an effort to represent large amounts of the audience that view these shows. Now, many people might lash out against white people, saying that this is just another example of not even thinking about other races equally. But it is nobody's fault other than the producer's at ABC. Am I still going to watch their shows, even though they seriously lack racial diversity? Yes. Am I just saying this because I am white? No, it's because some of their shows are my absolute favorites, the ones I look forward to each week.

Maybe this is the very reason why the diversity hasn't happened for ABC; has no one taken a stand against it?

Networks such as VH1 and MTV who also have shows centered around contestants finding love, feature plenty of different races, and all in the same season. If ABC does go with the logic I presented as a possibility above, would they cast an entire season of black contestants? Or an entire crew of asian contestants were they to venture into the 21st century and discover diversity? It would be interesting to find out. When you think about their other shows, like Desperate Housewives, they really are lacking in diversity on a larger scale than just the Bachelor and the Bachelorette. The only diversity found in Desperate Housewives is Gabby and Carlos, who are Latino. Other than that, all white. Take Grey's Anatomy for instance; other than Christina, who is Asian, again-- all cast members are white. I feel as if there is a trend on behalf of ABC to cast and feature prodominently just white people.

This post really made me think about something that I've never even noticed before. I'm usually a pretty detail oriented, observant person, and not once have I realized that the Bachelor and Bachelorette mainly cast white men and women. Is this intentional on ABC's part? I don't know, it could go either way. Maybe by some freak accident every contestant to make the cut has been white for the entire legacy of the show; somehow this doesn't seem physically possible, when taking into consideration the racial diversity in the demographics of the United States today. I wonder if ABC is conservative in their thinking that the success rates of people actually engaging in love and relationships as an outcome of the Bachelor/Bachelorette will only happen if all contestants are racially the same or similar? While this seems wrong, it seems to me like the most logical explanation as to why there is a major lack of diversity in this specific show.

In this class so far, I have felt either for or against most points, but I have never felt personally attacked. Although I still haven't felt personally attacked and probably won't (I feel it's important to keep a rational perspective on all of the controversial stuff we talk about in SOC119-- it's all for learning purposes, after all), this is the closest I've come to it. Sam, I understand that everyone views the business world differently, but I feel that it is wrong of you to judge our country's top crop of executives and managerial staff the way that you did in this post.

I agree with the first person who responded. As an Accounting major in Smeal here at PSU, I am currently interviewing for internships with the Big 4 firms and other major business advising firms that I hope to someday be employed by; and in a successful, high paying position might I add. I don't feel that this approach is wrong-- I will have worked extremely hard for any position I am lucky enough to secure upon graduation. Just as an education major works hard in hopes of getting to instruct and lead the 3rd grade classroom they've always dreamed of, I work hard every day because I dream of being an asset to a major business firm in New York. The rewards in terms of money just happen to be greater for jobs in the financial industry than they are elsewhere. Not that this is right, it's just how it is.

Now, I'm not saying that every CEO deserves their place in our economy's gears 100%. Sure, there are always going to be the people who get places because of who they know and not their natural-born abilities or self-harvested talent and hard work. But that's half of the game- to compete in a major global market such as the US's, you need to be a competitor and realize the importance of contacts and networking on an international level. It's how business is conducted each and every day, and how our economy remains in existence, even though that existence may be pretty meek today. This happens in other facets of our economy too; it isn't something just the business world can be criticized for. Going back to my example of an educator, it's typical for school districts to favor former students or local applicants before considering others when going through the recruiting and hiring process, before assessing pure skill and talent. That is just how the world is today, fair or not.

I am definitely impressed by Yvrose's story, though. She is a strong woman who has done amazing things given her circumstances and resources. With only a 5th grade education, she has been savvy enough to crack the code on effectively running a business that turns out a profit. But to say that all of the 'six-figure earning top executives' in our business world are undeserving compared to Yvrose, I think that that is a statement made in poor judgement. I think she deserves tremendous applause and recognition for what she has managed to accomplish, and I hope that the national media attention will work to her benefit financially. However, would she be placed in the US market, I am fairly confident she wouldn't make it out with the same success rate. Our market is highly competitive and complex, and has many more facets than the Haitian economy.

The true ingenuity in this story is not to compare Yvrose to US entrepreneurs and business executives and rank her higher than them. The true ingenuity is instead found in the fact that she thought of a successful strategy to raise a profit with very little knowledge of the ins and outs of business. This is seen in our economy when dire actions are needed or the many recent bailouts have taken place. People generally think of ingenius strategies when they need them the most. It would be interesting to see where Yvrose would be today had she been born a US citizen and spent all of her years in our country. Had she been given a formal education in our system and either been supported by a family or welfare, I wonder if she would still end up standing out as a business mogul. My guess is, she wouldn't. She wouldn't have the dire urge and need for that profit she is making in Haiti; there wouldn't be as much of a push for it. And she might have followed a passion instead of a profession out of necessity.

Who knows, maybe she would be working with Ben Bernanke setting the price of the US dollar. Or maybe she would just be another student who is just 'working their way through' classes, with no real drive realized yet. Maybe she would be one of the execs same is condemning. Our surroundings make a huge difference in the ways in which we develop and grow as a person, and Yvrose's stroy is remarkable for her native surroundings. It's not ok, though, to compare her drive to that of a U.S. businessman or woman's work ethic; different times, places, and situations all call for different measures, and no one is to say what measures Yvrose would take or would have taken up until this point in the US market.

I agree completely with Mike. Not saying that it won't happen sometime in the distant future, but for the time being, I do not feel that it is by any means fair to a child to bring them into either a gay or lesbian family through adoption. I feel that there really isn't anything that divides or separates a gay couple from a lesbian couple looking to adopt; they both may desire a child more than anything and whole-heartedly want to be parents and support a child, but it is against the child's best interest to be brought into a gay or lesbian family. There is such a large amount of negative connotation towards homosexuals, as Mike mentioned in his post. Until the day comes when society can generally accept homosexuality and not view it as anything different or even pay it any more attention than someone would to heterosexual marriage, I feel that adoption should be off limits for LGBT couples. Many people may pose the counter argument that any family situation is better for an adopted child than growing up in foster care or in an orphanage. This is true on so many levels, but I also have some personal experience with this that allows me to see the many holes in this counter argument. My younger brother was adopted from Russia when he was only a year old. Had my family not adopted him, he would most likely not be alive today. Malnourished and generally neglected, he had missed out on a whole year of developmental skills and even signs of affection, like someone saying 'i love you' every day, or paying attention to the 'pretty baby'. All of the abnormalities of orphanage life pose a serious problem for adopted children. Those who are adopted are more than fortunate to be blessed with a loving, supportive family. But their struggles don't end there. Because of the developmental delays many adopted children suffer, learning disabilities are common, as well as social integration issues. Luckily, my brother is a perfectly normal, moody 13 year old as we speak, but he had his fair share of struggles to get to that point and still deals with Auditory Processing Disorder, a learning disability, day in and day out. He has to compensate every day in the class room to pay attention 10 times harder than the average student, just to retain a little over half of the information he should. He is well liked and a stellar athlete, but in order to 'hide' his difficulties in the classroom, he has to put in so much extra effort and studying, he often breaks down from the stress of it all. Now, imagine these daily tribulations (which are very mild compared to the difficulties experienced by most adopted children), coupled with the thoughts of neglect and not being wanted that every adopted child experiences. It may sound strange, but think about it. You get to an age where you're old enough to understand that your 'mom' didn't want you and left you without another thought or a trace of her left behind. How do you feel about that when you come to realize the events that led you to your currently loving family, the only family you know? Not so great. It's an ongoing, tough issue. Supportive families help adopted children through it, until they can resolve those feelings on their own. But imagine the developmental delays, learning disabilities, and questions about your past all put together with the tons of attention and possible ridicule that may come from our society when you are the child of a gay or lesbian couple. I personally think that that would be way to much for an adopted child to bear. They don't deserve any amounts of unnecessary discomfort or ridicule because of their family life; that is one aspect of their lives that needs to be sound considering all that each and every one of them have been through at such a painstakingly young age. Until society no longer sees a difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals, I feel that it is not in the best interest of the children to allow gay and lesbian couples to adopt. Maybe someday, when society has subsided all of the current ridicule and animosity towards gays and lesbians, but not right now. It isn't fair for the children at this point in time.

I agree completely that the use of the word "negro" is outdated and no longer necessary as a part of the U.S. census. I am caucasian, so I have no real say as to whether or not the word is offensive, but I simply feel that it is no longer a commonly used term by which people identify themselves. Think about all of the times you have heard someone say Asian, black, or African-American... when was the last time you heard someone identify themselves as Negro? I feel as if the only people who may still use the term are elderly. When I hear the word Negro, it automatically triggers my mind to think back to slavery. In a day and age where slavery is abolished and racial equality and the continuous fight for it is everywhere you look, doesn't it seem wrong and outdate in and of itself to include a term that was heavily associated with slavery on the U.S. census in 2010? It is a part of the past, and there are other categories that people who may still identify as Negro also fit into. I think that the census will also be more accurate, because people will be polled on their racial backgrounds, instead of using an identifying term.

Another point in this article that I found very interesting was that there will also be the addition of a new rule allowing citizens to check off more than one box. This will definitely provide for more accurate information, as the box that used to say "2 or more races" is so vague, it would be like checking off a box that says "male or female". This will definitely improve the accuracy of the census and encourage more citizens to fill out their information fully, including multiple racial backgrounds they may identify with.

I am surprised to read that the US actually is moving forward with taking Negro off of the census, just because the census itself seems so permanent. But when you consider that only 0.14% of African Americans or blacks wrote that they were Negro, it makes sense. There just isn't a widespread use of the term Negro anymore. I thought that that was a great point brought up by ctm154 above my post.

It is interesting to think about the census as a whole--- It probably hasn't changed or developed too much for a long, long time. That makes being a part of the generation to see this new change means something. I feel that it means we are moving even further along the road of not even having to think about racial equality anymore- because it is automatically a given thing across society. This progress is evidenced in so many different aspects of our society. I'm glad that the US is paying attention to how few people still identify with an outdated term and making a direct change to improve the situation. It shows activism on the part of our country. It will be interesting to see what becomes a topic for discussion of change in the near future. For example, will we see the day when affirmative action is abolished? In many ways, that too has become outdated, as many qualified white students are turned away because they aren't a minority and can't help universities meet specific diversity quotas. That's another thing- don't diversity quotas just continue on the racist movement? I mean, in all honesty, thats racism in itself when you think about it.

Excited for all of the changes to come about in the near future. Time to reflect our societies awareness of equality.