As an education major, Noam Chomsky's accusations annoy me, however this is not the first time I've heard that the education system is about conformity and suppression. I can see where those statements may come from however I disagree with them, if I didn't I wouldn't aspire to be a teacher. Yes were put in to some classrooms and told to do assignments and those that complete those assignments with effort earn A's without much thought- but perhaps the teachers of such classrooms are not exceptional. Yes, primary grades are there to teach students societal structure. Some theorists have coined Kindergarten as boot camp, but I feel this societal structure needs to be taught in schools at a young age. We live in a democracy where there are hierarchal leaders, there are laws above us as individuals, and if there weren't our government would be a mess. In no way am I saying that the whole school system should be one that teaches "stupidity" or "not to think", but it also needs to lay the ground rules out on how to successfully function in society.

Personally I feel the older I get and the more classes I have taken in college only allows me to think more not less. It is true I have gotten here by adhering to assignments that my teachers presented me in my K-12 education, but I believe those assignments had a point. They were liberating me with some knowledge I hadn't previously possessed. Even if the assignment was there to get to the next step- in order to achieve higher thinking or thinking outside the box you need background knowledge to challenge. I find it ridiculous to claim that students at prestigious universities are those that have conformed most to the system. The reason that these universities are so prestigious and highly regarded is because their graduates have impacted our world for the better. Graduates from prestigious universities are thinking and creating new technologies, they go past what professors have told them and what they read from a textbook to create and think. That is what teachers are supposed to be doing in the first place, stimulating our thinking. They are not there simply to hand out assignments, grade them, and teach obedience- at least the influential ones aren't.

Chomsky bothers me when he says that those that actually do think and don't follow the "stupidity" are called behavior problems. Looking back on my peers that were the behavior problems and knowing where some of the students are post graduation, certainly wouldn't support that those kids were thinkers. Many of them are in jail and a few of them are standing at minimum wage jobs- they are not really thinking, just getting by. I understand a few of the kids that challenge teachers are smart individuals, but they are too far and few between to claim that the "behavior problems" realized they were being taught obedience .

I see Chomsky's point, but I feel that the conformity and teaching of stupidity can only be seen with bad teachers- those that aren't in the profession for the right reason to begin with.

As an Elementary Education major, this post has extreme interest to me. The initial reaction I had to the article in The New York Times, "Schools Stop Teaching Foreign Languages-Except Chinese", is that it is about time that America got on board. For a long time elementary and secondary schools in other countries, particularly China have been teaching their students English as well as Mandarin. With the internet globalizing the business world, its no wonder that China is becoming the global economic power- their school system is better and they are preparing their students for the working world at a young age, which is exactly what America needs to do!

It has been proven that in order to ever fully grasp a foreign language, you need to be taught it at a young age. It is necessary to teach elementary school students in America languages like Spanish and Chinese in order for them to ever fully grasp the language and have it as a resource as they enter the job market. I think its great that some schools have been hiring Chinese teachers in order to teach their students Mandarin. I wish that I would have been taught a foreign language beginning in my primary education. I like most other students took the few years of foreign language required in high school. I chose Spanish from a selection of Spanish, German, French, and Latin. The only offering of Chinese language was at night as a class you chose to sign up for and had to pay for. Like most of the posts before me I went through the motions in high school, learned a few phrases that aren't going to get me really far with Spanish, such as "Hola. Como Estas?" and "He Ganado"- which means "I won" when we played countless rounds of bingo- to memorize 20 vocabulary words. I even took 2 classes of Spanish here at Penn State- but I have given up on it because it was becoming much to difficult and I grew frustrated with it as the grammar became more complex when I actually attempted to form sentences which would allow me to communicate with Spanish-speaking individuals. I threw in the towel feeling that I was not taught the language at a young enough age and I was never going to fully understand and be able to speak and write in Spanish like I do in English. The little Spanish I do know, I plan to share with my students one day, and I hope that there is a Spanish speaking program in the school I will one day teach at, so my students have a better advantage at learning a foreign language than I did.

As for the video of Billy teaching us the phrase "Today's weather is very good", it clearly is amusing, but I can't hear the inflectional difference between "Today's" and "weather". Although I wish I were able to master a foreign language I don't think I will ever be able to because I can't distinguish the inflection in Mandarin much like someone with no English background may not be able to distinguish between the sounds of our words. The only way to produce valuable, well rounded, bilingual individuals in our country is to teach them in elementary school and all throughout their k-12 career.

As Sam prompted in the post, I do not understand how the creator of a game such as this one could have any respect for their mother, sister, or possibly daughter. Watching the CNN video I was disturbed that raping and assaulting women was the object of the video game. Admittedly, society is already negatively impacted by games out there such as, "Grand Theft Auto", where the object is to murder and steal to reach higher levels in the game (with scenes of prostitution intermingled) - these Japanese rape games are even worse! As a female I feel disrespected by the creator of these rape games and anyone who would play such a game for amusement. The message that the availability of these games sends to society in Japan and across the world is so disheartening. The object of assault on women seems to lend itself to the idea that it is OK to do such a thing and put women in a suppressed position in society. It is off the wall that anyone would spend money to play these rape games. It was unbelievable to me that the woman "gamer" from Britain found the object of the game acceptable and interesting to play. Those who have purchased these rape games are clearly disturbed and simply using these games as a way to conjure up possible ways to rape and assault females in real life. That to me is sick. I understand that women in many countries outside the U.S have not gained near the equality level of men and women in the United States, but is the world seriously this far behind? Have Women's rights gained no respect in the world as a whole?

I cannot understand why the government in Japan would not ban such a video game. It is completely ridiculous that in the CNN report none of the government officials are willing to talk about the video games or provide any statement. The one statement offered by a government official that the "government is looking into whether individual policing in the game industry is enough" - is complete bullshit. Clearly it is not enough if such rape games are being sold- the core values the game stands for are illegal in the country.

The games are truly barbaric. I would not consider myself as into the "gaming" world, so hearing of rape video games just frightens me as to what else is out there. The fact that these games and other violent games are on the shelves and SELLING represents such a huge step backwards for society. Video game creators are sending messages of acceptance of violence and assault- there should be no argument that it is a reverse psychology outlet for sick individuals- the games are only aiding their twisted thought process. When will the creation of games such as these end? Or is society too far disturbed and intertwined with such awful messages and the value of money that video game producers and governments will not pull games of rape and violence off of the shelves?

After reading the article from the New York Times, " Birth to Minorities Are Approaching Majority in U.S", I felt as though without ever having read the article I already knew that is how the demographics of our country were becoming. I recently learned in and Education Theory and Policy class, that 1 out of 5 school aged children in the United States is an immigrant- many of Hispanic decent. Reading the line, "the number of minority women- especially Hispanics- is likely to push minority births up " came as no shock to me- and after the census is published this year that fact may be common knowledge. As we grow in our struggle with Race Relations- different races are marrying and the children being produced from these relationships are not white children, they're multiracial. I feel that the swing in numbers of black and brown people versus white people may demonstrate a step towards the theme America has tried to stand for since colonization, "the melting pot". America has come a long way in the balance of numbers between colored people and white people- but does that necessarily mean the power in our country has shifted?

As a white person, I don't really feel any "twinge of concern" or worry that another racial class will put me down because numerically I am in the minority. The same question arose to me as did to the person posted before me, even though in the United States whites will be the minority in the coming years according to numbers- are whites truly going to be the minority based on the history of our country? Its true that the leaders being elected may be of another race than white, but what does that seem to matter? We cannot rewrite history- yes slavery has ended (well, Old Slavery) , but the world will still have knowledge that the white race dominated the black and Native American races at one point in time. Despite the numbers, will the moral image of white beauty really vanish from society (as demonstrated with the doll video in class)? As long as the moral values are being demonstrated as the United States always has stood for are the same- despite what race the leaders of our country are- I don't see it having a huge impact on current structure. There may be more colored people than whites, but the truth still is today that whites hold a lot of money in our country and in some ways that equals power. I cannot correlate sheer numbers to put the white race at the bottom of the stick - that is not the only factor I associate the majority with.

It in a way bothers me, the question posed to colored people- does this embolden you- yes it is true as a white person I have lived in the majority my whole life, but I do not walk around feeling powerful and assertive over any person currently considered a minority, so why should a color person. I don't believe that power in numbers is the only influence on American society.

As a white female, before having taken Soc 119, I never had much of a sense of "white guilt". This may have been because I was ignorant too much of the true history in America. All I had ever been taught up until taking Soc 119 was what was written in American history books. Today even with the knowledge that the largest genocide in the world occurred right where I am sitting to the Indians, my life is not dictated by "white guilt". As Dr. Richards has said in class there is a deep-rooted shame for what has happened. If I were too walk through a Native American reservation and see how poor the conditions of living are for people who truly had rights to this land, I would feel horrible. However, this white guilt is not something I think about often because I am not exposed to the remnants of the actions my ancestors took on a daily basis. Nor have I ever been taught them in a negative light in history class. Admittedly, I feel bad that such a catastrophic thing happened on the land I inhabit- but when do white people get to stop feeling the guilt? How many generations get to pass before such guilt was to be lifted. Sure it is in the back of my mind, but I can't change history or what ancestors from my race did. I can't change the genocide or the slavery that happened so many years ago, any more than a person from black decent or a person of Native American decent could change the history of their families who may have committed crimes or stolen.

I believe the girl who posed the question on the flip cam has an interesting point and it is possible that many history books used in classrooms are written about much white history in the United States. Although slavery is admitted too, the stories of triumph over slavery are glorified and highlighted in the texts- not how horrid the white race treated blacks. I had not learned until I was 20 years old that the largest genocide in the history of the world occurred on American soil. If history books quit glorifying the creation of the United States and told the true story of what happened- white people might be able to get past the white guilt lingering today. If the true story was written about what happened to Native Americans or slaves on the land we inhabit today, some of the deep-rooted guilt may be lifted because in a sense it would be the white race admitting and realizing their wrongs. Although, I agree that changing the history books used in American classrooms would help lift white guilt, I do not see it happening. If the textbooks were changed to document the truth, America could not represent the values it stands for today of developing a barren land and rising to the top through hard work.

After reading the Article, " US School Cancels Prom 'Over Lesbian Date'", I was shocked that this day in age there were still people so ignorant especially those in education in the Itawamba County Agricultural High School to gay and lesbian's rights. Although I am aware that legalized gay and lesbian marriage is only approved in some states, I felt that this day and age with famous stars such as Ellen Degeneres and Lance Bass being openly gay and the corporate world accepting the gay and lesbian community, the world was on the right path to being much more accepting of the gay community. I was not aware and quite frankly shocked and up hauled at what happened at the Mississippi high school. It just makes no logical sense to me that the school can get away with being so discriminatory to the gay community. To cancel a prom based on one students decision to have the same sex date seems extremely blown out of proportion. It is complete bull shit that the school can say Constance's date was a "distraction to the educational process"- as far as I am aware Prom happens outside the school day and school hours, how one persons date and choice of attire could be a distraction is so far fetched! I feel the school just opened up a greater distraction to the educational process by canceling the prom entirely, surely there are female students pissed off at the measure being taken (and possibly some males, as well). I would hope that the students whose prom has been canceled would be accepting and support Constance McMillen as she stands up for herself, but I worry judging on what the teacher said to McMillen (that she had to remember where she was) that students in the area will have the same ignorant beliefs as the school district. I am impressed by Constance's determination and willingness to stand up for what is right as a senior in high school, especially when she is aware that some of the students will direct their anger about the prom being canceled at her and not at Itawamba County Agricultural High School's skewed reasoning.

Reading the article was so eye opening to me because despite the fact that gay and lesbians are still arguing for marriage legalization and the right to adopt children, it no longer seems to be an issue in my eyes. In my life I feel that they are accepted. There was more than one lesbian or gay couple at my high school prom and all throughout high school there had always been gay and lesbian couples who would hold hands and kiss in the hall. I never paid any more attention to the gay and lesbian couples than I would to male and female couples holding hands or kissing in the hall. This article opened up my eyes to how some parts of the country are lagging behind in acceptance to the gay community.

I would have to completely disagree that the majority of themed parties are racist against black people. As a white female whenever I have been invited to a themed party the issue of race has never crossed my mind. Sure, parties such as high school stereotypes, golf pros and tennis hoes, and ceos and corporate hoes may shed bad light to a "culture" they are portraying, but I don't feel that any of it has to do with race. I could see if you had said the parties are degrading to women, because two of the common themed parties I mentioned above entail that the girls attending the party should dress as "hoes", however no where in these titles does race play a factor in the theme of the party. And although the above mentioned parties are degrading to women, many common theme parties that I've heard about and attended are simply for fun, such as high lighter parties, ABC parties, beach parties, Olympic races, and case races.
When you ask why people have theme parties it seems no different to me then having a Christmas party, Halloween Party, or 4th of July party. It's simply added fun to see the outfits that people have come up with and if someone isn't "dressed to theme" its not as if the person doesn't get in--unless the hosts are really extreme. I feel the themes are simply there to spice things up, sure they may provide added entertainment at the party. Such as highlighter parties where everyone is writing on each other, but in the theme of high school stereotypes, your doing the same thing you would have been at a regular party. At Penn State, that tends to be drinking heavily (although not for everyone) and quite often if makes what your wearing to an ABC party easier. As Sam mentioned in class this week, State Patty's day parties that happened all day long Saturday celebrated the fact that Penn State students are good at drinking large amounts of alcohol- none of these parties, where the theme was simply to wear green, discriminated against any race in my opinion. Never before this blog post had I considered theme parties racist, nor had I been under the impression that white kids were more often throwing these parties than another race. From my personal experience the most themed parties I have attended have been at an Asian male's apartment.
Sure I could see if someone were to dress as a gangster at a high school stereotypes party some black people may be offended, but at the same time white kids may get offended by those dressing as preps with polos and popped collars. I don't feel that any themed party is aimed at discriminating or poking fun at the black race. The only people whom I could understand being offended by the recent popularity of "Jersey Shore" parties are Italians- who don't want to be associated with guidos and the lifestyle of gym, tan, laundry, but that show is where the racial tension begins, not the themed parties designed to celebrate it.

Yvrose's story is truly remarkable. As I listened to the NPR broadcast and heard that she had been running such a business to support herself and her family -- I was astonished to find out that Yvrose only had a 5th grade education. As the broadcast explains her borrowing $600 dollars from a microcredit bank, then taking that money to purchase goods in the Dominican Republic (which has a larger market than Haiti), I was astonished at her business intelligence. It didn't even stop there she would loan the product to shopkeepers and two weeks later collect the money from the products with interest. In 5th grade I was simply spitting back random pieces of information about Sacajawea that my teacher had spoon fed to me. In no way would I have been able to understand such concepts as loan maturities and currency exchange rates. I cannot help, but to feel saddened that Yvrose, a woman who works so hard, and is so intelligent, lost everything as many of her clients were killed, her store was destroyed, and she lost all of her profit in Haiti's earthquake. Undoubtedly, if Yvrose was fortunate enough to be born in America and attend Penn State like myself, she may be in a prestigious business firm, making six figures, and adding her expertise to the company.
As for how I would do in a country like Haiti, I would probably fail with the mentality I have built growing up in America. I would know that there was a better way of life out there and that the money Yvrose makes in Haiti, her $100 American dollars life savings lost, is a dismal amount that could be made for the skills she has. If I took a moment to walk in her shoes with having the knowledge of what life in America was like I would be discouraged to try so hard, but Yvrose knows no different than life in Haiti. Had I grown up in Haiti like Yvrose, never having the fortunate experience I have had to grow up in America, I would probably be trying just as hard as Yvrose to fight my family and simply feel that that is the way life is. Admittedly Yvrose is an intelligent business woman and I may not have been able to come up with such a complex way of income for myself and my family, I feel I would make it by, I would go hungry, and obviously my quality of life would drop drastically. The people living in poor countries like Haiti are strong from my middle class American point of view, but I don't know that they would consider themselves strong when they aren't aware of a different life style.
To respond to Sam calling business students in America "washrag" and not coming up with unique ideas, I would have to disagree. Sure that some people do get where they are with who they know but there are plenty of American business students, and American business men and woman that are just as smart or smarter than Yvrose. The people that have been innovative in America's business world have led the United States to the economic prosperity it endures. After all, isn't it all a balance of freewill and determinism?

Technology is certainly advancing, yet I do not know that the technology Douglas Hines used to produce his $7,000 sex doll Roxxxy, is bettering society. I'm not shocked at the technology that is out there that enables Roxxxy to talk back to the men purchasing the doll, but I am shocked that no where in the CNN article does it refer to the dominance the male has over his "female partner". As mentioned in Sam's post, men and women have different sexual needs, its possible that women won't always be quiet if the man were to wish so, or talk about fishing after sex, but that is part of a healthy relationship- compromise. Getting to know another person whom one is intimate with is an important part of a sexual relationship, eventually even $7,000 dollar Roxxxy is going to repeat herself. Yet, men then have the ability to hit the off switch. A Male ordering the doll will be able to have his way with the doll and then turn her off, and throw her on the floor when he is done---the only thing he has accomplished is getting his sexual drive out of his system for a while, but he's still lonely at the end of his escapade and short a few thousand dollars.

In our male dominated society, what is Hines sex toy portraying, other than males are able to have their way with woman, and simply turn them off when they no longer have a need for them. It blows my mind what Hines family and supposed wife think about his new device. He claims to be happily married, but what made him think of the doll if he has no use for it? What could his wife possibly think about Roxxxy's proportions? At 5 foot 7 inches and 120 pounds, Roxxxy has proportions similar to that of Barbie- which are impossible! If its not the media or a little girls toy, its a sex toy that portrays what some males in society feel is "a beautiful woman", one that is impossibly thin. The thought brought up about married women being happy to allow Roxxy take care of their female chores is ludicrous. As a female I would be embarrassed that my significant other needed a doll to satisfy him, that my relationship with him sexually or otherwise wasn't enough. If Hines wife would rather him have a sex doll to fulfill sexual desires, so be it, but I feel many woman would wish their counterpart would be able to fulfill their desires with them - not an expensive sex toy.

As some people mentioned in previous posts the doll may be beneficial to be used by those that have committed sexual assault or rape, but at the same time allows them to think up new ways to dominate their "partner". As I don't have much background in psychology I wonder if the doll would be beneficial in allowing these people to let out sexual frustrations? Or hindering as they think up new sick thoughts to take out on partners?

As "twenty something college students" I feel we often take language for granted, it is something that constantly surrounds us and enables us to learn and grasp understanding of the world, but many of us never think twice about it. I can only speak for myself in saying that the blog entry "All That is Solid Melts into Air--Including our Words" has offered me a new way of looking at language whether it be my native English language, or that of Boa Sr's whose is now no longer existent. In our world we are moving towards rapid social and economic change. We strive for globalization and technologies such as the internet are only helping to aid in achieving our goal. In order to communicate and interact on a global scale, there must be some common language or means of communication to do business. In my English 100 class I recently learned that English is becoming the world's dominant language as it is taught to children in places such as China, Germany, and France at a young age. Admittedly, languages like Chinese, German, and French don't have as great a threat of extinction as half of the 7,000 languages today, the same issue is the reason that come 2090 there will probably be about 4,000 languages in existence. Children in Tribes such as Boa Sr.'s and Johnny Hill Jr. are being "mainstreamed" and taught languages that will help them do business with the world as they grow older. It seems today children are taught more common languages and those children that belong to tribes aren't embracing the cultures or languages of their ancestors.

When I initially read the blog post I could not understand why Boa Sr. was the last to speak her language, surely she had family or offspring that could have obtained the language? I could not understand why they would not place a toddler around her, letting he or she absorb the language. Children have such an astonishing ability for language acquisition. When you are born you are able to hear the different inflections in languages and tones to understand ANY language. Eventually the child loses this capability and is only able to hear all of the inflections of their native language. Even though language acquisition is much harder as one gets older, why aren't members of Johnny Hill's tribe TRYING to learn some of the language so that it doesn't die with him? As Johnny explains why the death of his language is occurring it opened my eyes to a realization that on top of the loss of many tribal languages we all continue to lose part of our culture and wisdom from our ancestors. " Johnny has tried to teach his children and others in the tribe. 'Trouble is,' he sighs, ' they say they want to learn it, but when it comes time to do the work nobody comes around.' " The death of these languages is due to laziness and ignorance. We deny embracing different cultures and languages as we move towards a globalized world. The death of these languages and loss of the people who pass with them is a tragedy.