Ever since the World Wars and the development of high tech weapons, the world, especially the United States, has been addicted to war. We see a string of wars such as the Korean War, Vietnam War, Cold War, Gulf War, and most recently, the Iraq War. The list of wars keeps growing, and does not include other conflicts such as Libya. According to the statistics shown in the video, the Western hemisphere’s war casualties, which includes both military and civilian deaths, have also increased dramatically.

First of all, let us address a few key issues. Why did the number of casualties dramatically increase in modern wars? The most obvious explanation would be the increased usage of big guns and bombs. During the American Civil War, soldiers marched onto a field, shot at each other with rifles and cannons, and fought bare-handed when they ran out of ammunition. This warfare technique left most civilians untouched and safe. In contrast, modern warfare involves billion dollar fighter jets dropping bombs on cities and on civilians. Ninety percent of all casualties in the Iraq War were civilians, Iraqi civilians.

So, what is the rationale behind all this fighting? To bring freedom and democracy to the world. However, what is freedom and democracy? Do they even exist? As established in sociology class, the American ideal of democracy does not really exist. We are fighting to establish legalized bribery in other countries. Even our guest speaker spoke about how only the rich controls the current Iraqi government. Our ideas of freedom are also influenced by invisible factors and forces, meaning one country’s idea of freedom might be different from another country’s depending on what they have been taught to believe.

No matter what, war will always exist. In fact, the rate of fighting will probably continue to increase in the future because natural resources (mainly petroleum) are hitting its peak while demand keeps exploding. People are scrambling to fight over those resources, and bigger guns will be developed to help attain them. Whoever wants to win must kill. Therefore, we can be assured to see more wars and casualties.

In today’s society, truth is relative. There is no real truth, no right or wrong, and no normal or abnormal. Everything can be reinterpreted and redefined based on how one is feeling on any particular day. You can wear flip flops one day or sneakers the next day. You can be a woman one day and a man on another day. Someday, you can be a monkey if you feel like it, too. Everything is up for grabs, including one’s own physical sexuality. So how do we figure out what makes a man a man and a woman a woman?

Why do we have to choose to be male or female? We are either male, or we are female. If we’re both, we’re both. If we’re female, but we look and feel male, why do we want to change ourselves into male? Why do we even have to be a gender? Things have never been so complicated until now when feelings and emotions rule our society. We all know feelings change, so why are we subjected to them?

Honestly, I do not even know what makes a woman and a man. I just know that society needs stupid rules and ideas in order to be stable. Mr. Devoureau’s boss was subjected to the rules of her job in the same way as Mr. Devoureau. This is not a case of discrimination; it is far more complicated. You cannot just change your gender like you change your clothes and expect others to immediately accept that you are a man today when you were a woman yesterday. What if you decide that you do not like being a man after all and that you want to be a woman again?

Why do we even question the notion of gender? It is just the way it has been since the dawn of human history. A man is a man and a woman is a woman. If you are neither or both, you do not tell anyone. Only recently, a tiny fraction of human history, did it become alright for people to come out and be different. It was not until now that people have the option to change their roles physically. So, we are giving into modern society’s idea that we can be whoever we want to be. Changing one’s sex or even firing someone because he is transgendered are therefore acts of giving into the invisible strings.

For the most part, people hold an innate sense that war is not glamorous. There will always be a winner and a loser. There will always be bloodshed and hatred. There will always be wounds and scars. Wars are perpetual; they last even after the peace treaty is signed and the soldiers return home. War affects generations of not only those who fought on the front line, but also those left behind to defend the home front and shoulder the burden to keep life running smooth and sane. Those people are the children, women, and elderly.

When I first saw the video, I wonder why mass rapes occur in male-dominated societies. Why do the male soldiers from places such as Rwanda and Sudan overtake villages and rape their women? Through the scope of sociology, I hypothesize that one of the main reasons male soldiers rape is because their society views all women as material possession. Men are superior to women, and their ability to conquer and rape defenseless women humiliates the enemy, who could not protect their own wives and daughters.

Another question follows the first one: Why do we not hear of the same incidences occur in the U.S. or other western societies? Again, societal structure and thinking greatly influences how western cultures treat women during war times. Our society’s target in gaining victory does not involve conquering the women of our enemies. Instead, we prefer to directly humiliate our enemies through different methods such as “tar and feather” or “waterboarding”.

No matter what, every single person in this world comes in contact with an aspect of war sometime in their life. They are all somewhat impacted by current or previous wars no matter which culture they live in. For example, we have family members deployed in Afghanistan, friends who fought in the Vietnam War, or colleagues who were refugees from Rwanda. Sometimes, we deal with war directly and witness the violence firsthand like the Iraqi women mentioned in the video. Othertimes, families of veterans deal indirectly with the consequences of war in psychological issues such as a son suffering from Post-traumatic Stress Disorder. War brings about endless societal problems and consequences. Many say that the real victims of war are civilians, but I say the real victims of war are humanity.

I know for sure suffering and poverty will exist until the end of the world. Let us all wake up and face reality; people are selfish. The rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. After listening to the last few lectures on inequality and power, I start to wonder why I even wanted to help the poor in the first place. Why do I want to pursue social studies and help developing communities stand on their own feet? Why do we bother to get rid of suffering when all the odds go against us?

To start off on my journey to answer my own questions, I agree with Sam that ‘legalized bribery’ exists. I am forever enlightened by this reality, which explains my frustrations with the Congress and Senate on their politics and constant inaction. Politicians like to demonstrate their American pride and campaign on representing the people. However, I realize that most of the time their words and actions are just for show. Forget about Republicans versus Democrats! None of them sincerely care about the other 90% of the population, just their affluent friends. There is nothing we can do about the injustice either, but simply pray that some of the leftover benefits they gain in Washington somehow trickle down to the averages joes.

Now that we figured out there is no democracy in America, what can we do? I know I will continue to help the suffering despite the lack of light at the end of the tunnel. If I can help alleviate one child’s poverty and enable him or her to attain an education, then I gave him or her hope. If life sucks as bad as it sounds, every person will commit suicide and there will be chaos. Human beings like to see the good in situations, and our hope for the best is what sustains life. Professors will always make rules that benefit themselves more and policymakers will enact laws that benefit them more than the people. Should people keep fighting their causes, then? Yes, because that is the only way society stays sane amidst all the inequality and oppression.

Religion will always exist. People desire common ground with a group. People need answers to questions regarding life’s purpose and the afterlife. What is religion, anyway? Religion originates from cults, where a single charismatic person with a great idea attracts a small following of people. The same small following eventually grows into a large religious institution with its own set of rituals and rules. Jesus, Muhammad, and even Joe Paterno are considered cult figures. Even though the article mentions a steep decline in religious affiliation in modernized nations such as Ireland, Netherlands, and Australia, it does not imply that religion is going to die out like the dinosaurs. We do not need to panic and start saving religion, the study merely demonstrates that only certain religions are dying out, not religion as a whole.

Religion will never become extinct. Sociologically, we know that the larger the religious institution, the harder it is to sustain it. People connect with the sacred more individually or in a smaller group. However, it can then be hypothesized that those religious and “affiliated” people who survive the “decline in religion” will attract back new followers, and cyclically establish religion again. New religions will also be formed. For example, Paterno-ism, the belief in Joe Paterno, atheism, the belief in no god, and paganism, the belief in everything, can surely take off as official institutions. Justin Bieber and other stars alike can be considered “religions” as well.

Frankly, religion is based on faith, not on rationality. Those crazy Bieber fans are influenced by other crazy fans to go get the same haircut, wear the same clothes, and try to marry the same kid. They have faith in Justin’s greatness, in his music, and in his good looks. However, if they really stop and think through their obsessive actions, they will realize that Justin Bieber is not a god, and he will eventually grow old and wrinkled. Religions will never cease if Hollywood keeps producing mega tween stars like Bieber. Essentially, people can never authentically believe in nothing. You either believe in one thing or another. Religions can only be sustained by people. Therefore, as long as humans walk the earth, religions will survive.

Can LGBT families function in the same way and provide proper care just as well as traditional families? For Zach Wahls, who grew up raised by two mothers, there was no difference. Despite his unconventional family circumstances, Zach succeeded in both school and community. He did not suffer from any emotional traumas or become a wild brute. He appears to be a normal and typical young man. In examining the sociological implications, LGBT families can most definitely carry out some of the major functions of a family.

Our society shapes the structure of family. Human beings have agreed long ago that a family unit with one or two parents can efficiently rear future adults while maintaining societal stability. Families exist for a number of different reasons. For example, they are responsible for socializing the young, transmitting cultural and wealth status, as well as providing basic shelter and emotional care. All of these requirements make sure that society operates without a glitch. Zach gives some candid examples in his speech, where he demonstrates that his parents’ sexual orientation had no impact on the content of his character. Like many of us, he is an engineering student at Iowa. He is a community leader, business owner, and brother. He fits right in with the rest of society, appearing to be properly cared for and groomed, well mannered and relational. Zach mentioned that many people never knew he was raised by two mothers, and I would not have noticed either.

Zach’s story is a living testimony that having gay parents has no visible negative effects on a child’s upbringing. Whether one has straight parents, gay parents, or an entire tribe as parents, one can still contribute positively to society. Even if one does not agree with homosexuality, one should not treat a fellow human with contempt based on the identity of their parents. Much debate still rages on whether LGBT families can raise children properly. Many people fear that those children would end up like their parents; rebellious against ‘standard’ society. For the children of those families, there is no debate. Zach is who he is today in part because of his parents, who disciplined him and loved him. Just like any of our parents, Zach’s parents did their duty by making sure he grows up to be a responsible citizen, socialized, fed, and educated.

If I win the lottery, I will use the money to pay for my tuition. Except, I do not play the lottery. I do not believe that wealth falls from the sky at random in the lives of ordinary people. Sure, the government and a long lost great aunt might create some exceptions, but I believe wealth comes from hard work and smart management. You have more chance of becoming a millionaire overnight if you make it to Hollywood. I mean, Hugh Laurie earns $40,000 per “House” episode! Becoming rich might greatly help my family, but there are always implications that will happen like the ones mentioned in the article. Why do people desire to be rich anyway? Why don’t people desire to be frugal, poor, or even debt-free?

Our society shuns the idea of being poor and destitute. When we see poverty, we want to get rid of it. We equate poverty to pain, and we hate being in pain. From birth, we are taught to do well in school, get a college degree, and make lots of money to secure a nice retirement. In the process, we manage to accumulate a headache load of student loans, home mortgages, and credit card debt. Sociologically, the “American Dream” string that is attached to us tenses up every time we make a major life decision. The string causes many to live a lifestyle they cannot afford. After all, we are Americans. We must have a big mansion and a pocket full of cash. We are Americans and we must not be poor.

Not every person in the world is meant to be “rich”. Many times we see lottery winners go bankrupt because they do not know how to properly handle all that money. In sociology class, we talked about how one family bought a mansion, threw all of the expensive wine out the door, and replaced the cellar with cheap beer instead. We all want to be rich, but do we really know how to be rich? Most people desire to be rich because we are defined by the world in which we live. Our world emphasizes the greatness of money and even paints the illusion that money will make us happy. What if one day it becomes socially acceptable to be poor? Will we all skirmish to draw out every last cent in our bank account and give them away?

Indeed, social structures shape our education system. However, I disagree with some points the speaker mentioned. I believe the system that society has accepted and adopted works just fine, even if we are hypothetically processed and molded to all hold the same skills and learn the same way. Having been educated in different countries and systems, the American education is by far superior to the rest of the world. Here, teachers do not physically beat the education system into their students. There is a reason why we see many international students flocking to the Penn State campus, because the American education is recognized and effective. Sociologically, we have to accept the form of education we have right now. Society needs structure to function. We need a standardized system to ensure every student go the path to which they are intended, otherwise there will be chaos.

Why do we even cast all of the blame on our educational system? What about the students or even teachers? Kids can be extremely manipulative in the classroom. Many times, I see students run the show in the classroom. In this case, should not the teacher be at blame instead of the system? Maybe we should focus on training better teachers instead of reforming the entire education system, which is already trending away from the “work hard-college-job” mentality anyway. Who said our students do not have the freedom to express themselves? Just look around and see the hundreds of after school activities in which kids participate. We are not all robots. Different learning styles can be accommodated in a single classroom.

Granted, many great men and women succeed without the current educational structure, for example, Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard, but the rest of society is run by those who work hard in school and hold college degrees. Schools do not try to squelch our creativity or forbid us from pursuing scientific inquiries. Ivy League colleges encourage expression of originality from their applicants. Perhaps I do not see the same complaints that the lecturer sees since I was educated in a public school system where individuality and different learning styles were encouraged. I even had the freedom to choose public, charter, or private schools. I agree that the current educational system is old and need to see some improvements from the Enlightenment and Industrialization periods, but it works. The current general system of learning allows for maximum efficiency. Once we learn how to learn, we can go on to effectively pursue our passions.

That’s a lot of sex in one night. Culturally, it is surprising to see that polyandry exists and is practiced. I grew up as a part of a monogamous society where the institution of family consists of only 2 parents. I personally felt really uncomfortable when I watched the video clip. In a society where we are taught from birth to find the “one” and where people look down on divorce, the act of polygamy is deemed wrong and even horrific. I understand that for economic efficiency, these people must do what it takes to survive. They are maintaining peace and function in their community because polyandry prevents overpopulation and exhaustion of resources. The people on the video are simply acting on their internal instinct to survive.

Why are most societies monogamous? Monogamy came to be established as the social norm in the Western culture because it is also practical. Men and women have the natural tendency to get jealous. At some point, people figured out polygamy causes conflicts and squabbles within the family. Another reason why most people do not practice polygamy in our society is because there is no need to ensure a family line. With the advancement of medicine as well as improved living conditions, children survive to adulthood. Parents no longer have to rely on their children to care for them in their old age with the advent of social security.

Western modern society is shaped by equality of human rights. Polygamy is unacceptable because women should have the right to be individuals and choose their own mates. Women no longer solely depend on their fathers or husbands to provide for them. It is socially acceptable for women to choose not to get married.

Social structures shape our views of marriage and family. We can function without multiple wives and husbands, while their environment demands a different system. Humans may have the instinct of “survival”, but our urges are blanketed by the sense of practicality. However, how are we, the Westerners, any different from this society if we allow the practice of open marriages? Monogamy works for our society, and polyandry works for their society.

I once spent a weekend with an Amish community in Virginia. While there, I felt like I was on vacation even without indoor plumbing. When the sun rose, the Amish family got up and worked. The men took care of the livestock and the women cleaned and gardened. They did not check their cell phones every half hour, thinking about where they need to be and what they need to do next. They did not rush to church on Sundays, but somehow everybody arrives on time. Time does not rule their lives.
Maybe if we fixed this time problem, we will stop procrastinating. Our procrastination problems most likely stemmed from our lack of resting. It is our natural instinct telling us to stop working and sleep! We need to stop living like we own time. I believe if Americans cut their ‘self-contained’ strings, the passport ownership rate would dramatically increase. If Americans exposed themselves to more of the diverse cultures outside of their bubble, they will appreciate international cuisine more. I mean, what’s with some Americans and their hatred of tofu?