It’s amazing how many things we do based on latent discrimination or because of the stereotypes we don’t even second guess. Because of this Sociology class and a disabilities class I had this semester I have started to realized how ignorant I was to diversity. I thought in a certain way and thought nothing of it. A lot of it was based off of society portrayed things, how my friends/family thought, or just society in general. Now, after having things pointed out to me I commonly ask myself “how come I never thought about this/thought about it in this way?” With this knowledge I’ve learned that the damage here is done by assuming. Not just on my part but on everyone’s part. If someone in the news industry bases something off a stereotype and it is portrayed in the media it becomes a stereotype. Then that stereotype becomes a normal stereotype to the point that people never second guess it.
In order to avoid falling into this trap I feel that reading helps. By reading from the perspective of those different from you, or part of a minority, or an oppressed group it really opens your eyes. One example I can think of is disabled people. Before taking the course this semester I assumed that disabled people wanted pity and felt that it was unfair they weren’t like “normal” people. But what is normal? Then after seeing it from a disabled person’s perspective numerous times I have realized they don’t want to be conformed to the “normal”. What many people view as a disadvantage due to an impairment of a body part—w hen compared with the “normal” body—is actually just a part of who the person is. In other words, their “disability” does not affect their quality of life; something “normates” often assume. The same goes for race relations. An example is the relationship between Americans and Iranians. Before talking to Mozziar via Skype, the general consensus was that Iranians as a country hated Americans. However, after having a conversation with Mozziar—and seeing it from his eyes—we were able to learn that there is a small group that dislikes us and a majority of Iranians like us and do not approve of their own government. This would be a good habit to make. Talking to people from their shoes and not seeing them based on a societal stereotype. If I had an interest and intention of doing this, I could avoid the issue with the chair distance in the interview situation. If I saw every person as an individual and as a way to learn more about their culture instead of using my very limited knowledge about other nationalities to assume things about them, I could avoid “latent” discrimination within me. In my eyes, the only way to avoid “latent” discrimination is to be conscious of it and to work everybday to treat each person that passes my path as an individual and as an opportunity to learn something new about another culture; as well as, something new about myself. Without this consciousness, one would fall back into his old ways. He would go back to letting subconscious stereotypes and thoughts affect his actions and in turn create unintentional discrimination.

This question requires a two part answer for me. One, I don’t want to ruin a guy’s ego and two I feel like society/media/advertisements tell us (women) that we don’t necessarily have orgasms that often—and as discussed in class—that everything is focused on the male. Not only in pop culture and the media did I feel this was the norm but talking to friends as well; it just doesn’t seem very common (or expected) among women.
Going back to the ego part; males rely greatly on sex to prove their manhood. If all the sudden they hear they didn’t fully satisfy a girl they may lose confidence in themselves. No one wants to hear that they suck, but at the same time a little constructive criticism is going to help them in the long run. For me, I feel it would be easier to tell a guy after being in a relationship with him for a bit because the more comfortable you become the more likely you will discuss what each other likes and what feels good for the other person.
On the other hand, if society is saying that sex ends with a male orgasm; why would I go out of my way to share my voice and lack pleasure that I am receiving. Take for example, the movie Because I Said So, when the main character Milly is taking care of her mom who developed laryngitis they start having a conversation about sex (well Milly does the talking and her mom answers via notepad and pencil). Her mom asks what an orgasm feel s like and Milly is shocked her mom has never had one. Milly eventually asks her mom why not, and her mother responds that her father said “he didn’t have time, he worked at nights and slept during the day”. To me this plainly says it is common for women to not have orgasms even after being married for years. Other examples, as discussed in class display both a woman and a man having an orgasm at the same time; the chances of this are slim. Although many of understand some of what happens in movies doesn’t happen in real life; we still take in the information and make something out of it. A majority of the time it’s that sex ends when a male has an orgasm. Why then, as a woman, would I ever tell a man that I didn’t orgasm and wasn’t satisfied if it was understood in society that it doesn’t happen often.
All in all, the combination of personal feelings of the male and what society portrays would make me hesitate to share my voice about not having an orgasm. Yet, if the relationship was strong enough I would eventually open up.

I thought there were various things interesting about Sam’s lecture on immigration. I personally didn’t have a strong opinion on whether making immigration legal or illegal was the better thing to do. Honestly, I didn’t know how long it took to get a green card in this country. After hearing Eric’s story and realizing how long it takes, it gave me insight as to why immigrants coming to Mexico would rather sneak across the border than wait over ten years to get a green card. One thing I have always seen in advertisements or heard about through politics is that the reason immigration is illegal is because there are Americans who are without jobs so letting other people from other countries in would just make jobs even less scarce because more people would be competing for them. I never really questioned this until Sam brought up a solid point: Are Americans taking these kinds of jobs the immigrants from other countries would. And 9 times out of 10 the answer is no. Most Americans won’t do the type of hard labor for the price that a farmer or manager would be willing to pay them for that labor. And on the other end of the scale, higher up jobs are the same way. We need people with STEM education to create technology for us. Therefore, from this perspective immigration is a good thing. However, as Sam mentioned several times it’s a complicated issue. Both sides has its pros and cons.
One thing that really stood out in my mind was the empathy side of it. All of us were illegal immigrants at some point. And this isn’t the first time the government has tried to keep people from reaching the border; there’s been numerous and ridicule reasons. One thing that Same pointed out that I found ironic was which race in California was most pushing for immigration regulations. Mexican and Hispanic people were more likely to push for these regulations and laws. This is like saying, “Oh, I got in the country out of luck but I don’t want you to have the change to come to this country as well”. It’s silly if you think about it. One issue I could see with immigration is perhaps overpopulation. However, based on what Sam said in class not that people around the world want to come here to live. People aren’t just waiting around hoping our immigration laws were change and dreaming about a life in our country. One reason Mexicans may be more driven too is because of their proximity to our country and their desire to find work. The border between the U.S. and Mexico is man-made. Although I previously knew this I found I never really thought about it. We are one big land mass with Canada and Mexico, it seems silly—in my eyes—to insist they stay in their own country.

If I could send any message to the American people it would be that we need a change of attitudes and we need to be open to new, nondiscriminatory perspectives rather than the “social norm”. I would send the message that discriminating against anyone for any reason not only hurts that person, but society and yourself. I say you end up hurting yourself because you only let a certain group of people within your inner circle and this could lead you to miss out on experiences you otherwise would have encountered if it hadn’t been for your close-minded way of thinking. I don’t think anyone deserves to be viewed as less than another person: rather its discriminatory thinking to base someone’s worth on their skin color, gender, or if they have a disability. If I had to convey this message I think the best way of doing so would be through the performance arts; either a play or a TV show of some sort. Although other forms of art such as music, or paintings, or anything or the sort could convey the message also, I feel that seeing people actively portray it would be the most effective. Also, a play or TV show would be accommodating to certain people with disabilities such as those who are blind would be able to hear the play and those who are Deaf could have a translator signing out what is being said. I want to get this kind of message out because I want to see change. I want to see change in people’s attitudes and assumptions made about one another. When you think about it, it’s silly. I’m going to make an assumption about someone because of their skin color. Because all people with that skin color are the same, and have the same traits, and the same values, it’s like their all a part of this secret club and all do certain things because they are a part of that club. What? To me this makes no sense. How can I make generalizations based on a physical trait? That would be like saying all red heads have similar IQs and act similar and etc. I could make up an entire story about them and that would become their generalization. These attitudes have an effect on people. These minorities are affected; they are oppressed. We need all different kinds of people to make the world go round. Forming biases based on differences in physical characteristics, types of embodiment, gender, levels of intellectual development results in certain characteristics being favored over others and creates inequalities in our ideas of different individuals human worth. This is unacceptable. I want to see change because I feel empathy for those who are oppressed. I don’t pity those who have a disability because they are in a wheelchair for life or anything like that, but rather I feel empathy for the amount of ignorance towards these people the general public has. Or the amount of disability a society creates towards these people or the lack of accommodation for them within the built environment. I want to see change is people’s attitudes and perspectives because I think it will bring changes the amount of inequality.

In my personal opinion I feel that changing people’s attitudes towards other groups would be more effective than giving handouts to an oppressed group. If you think about it a handout doesn’t just help the group it’s aimed to help. As we discussed in class, if we apply affirmative action to benefit women, virtually every group benefits. If women are more likely to get a job after this is set in place then a family or even just a married couple would have a second source of income allowing them to afford more/nicer things, in turn the husband benefits too. Same with if this married couple has children, their children will be better off. However from family to family everyone is still moving up at the same pace. In other words, as the poor may benefit from this because helping women helps a woman’s family. This is good; we want this to reduce inequality. But is it really reducing inequality? Because if it’s to help all women wouldn’t every woman’s—who takes advantage of it—family would benefit from it. So although it does improve wealth and opportunity compared to what a poor family once had, in terms of inequality overall each class improves; ensuring the same amount of inequality/ space between groups. Like I said before I think there is a more effective way of making a difference.
I feel that changing people’s attitudes and giving them a new perspective will enable them to act to prevent discrimination and take action. For instance, along with this class some of my other classes this semester are allowing me to view the world in a new light; and gain perspectives that would have never crossed my mind previously. A disability studies class that I have this semester is a prime example. I am not going to lie, before this class I saw those with individuals as having something “wrong” with them and even pitied them a bit. Due to all these medical diagnoses, and said “defects” I saw them as having a harder life. However, learning the opinion and the history of those with disabilities my view has done a complete 360. I now see how they value their lives and they aren’t less they are just different. Enough about this, my point is that if the government had just started to give them handouts it would have amplified my pity for them even more. However, by gaining this new perspective I would take the initiative to ask what they want instead of assuming I know what is best for them. Although not every person would be as passionate about this type of study as I am , just creating awareness would make a difference in my opinion. Because any minority group: Latinos, African Americans, people with disabilities, or Indian Americans—to name a few—are not oppressed because of a biological difference but because of a societal, attitude difference that in a sense disables or disadvantages them.

In terms of our relationship with Haiti and our giving of aid and everything our relationship entails, I was overall upset with what I learned in lecture. To me it seems like the U.S. in acting in such a way that an individual would who is more concerned about how they appear to others than their actual character. What makes me say this is the fact that we give $350 dollars in aid to Haiti. Although this number may look good to others in reality it’s not as heartfelt as one may think. First off, this number is a very small amount of our total funds available as a country. As discussed in class, other countries may not give as much in terms of financial amount, yet they are giving substantially more in terms of percent of their funds available. Not only that but the way in which we give those funds; we do it to benefit our own economy. We give $350 million in aid of American products; so its American companies who are benefitting from this type of aid first hand. We may appear to be doing good for Haiti but in reality our motives seem to be off. Sam brought up in class how much rice we force Haiti to purchase from us: a whopping $475 million. Are we doing more harm than good? Is this aid out of guilt for what we force Haitians to do in terms of trading and tariffs? Who knows for sure. But either way we are costing Haiti $125 million dollars each year and who goes to say how much the aid in American products actually helps them. It’d be another story if we gave them the money to create jobs or to teach them a skill set. Or if we didn’t force them to buy our rice. The U.S. seems to have so much fear of other countries gaining power. It’s to the extent that the government subsidizes rice farming just so we can hold on to that power over Haiti.
To me all of this shananigans is ridiculous. It makes me wonder about what other shady things our government does that they keep quiet or that not many other people are aware of. I feel that if people learned of our relationship with Haiti they would want to make a stand or do something about it. We are one of the main reasons Haiti as a nation has been living in poverty. They definitely have the hard workers and the right type of land to flourish as a country with an economy depending on rice farming, yet we are in the way. We make it impossible for them to build a stable economy. I don’t see how we could be so fearful or so cruel.

When it comes to fear of death I have tried to use it in a somewhat positive way before Sam’s last class. Before learning of the accounts Sam said people have discovered on those who die and then come back to life I had no idea what to expect of death. I had hoped that there was life after death. However, the unsureness always made me uneasy. For this reason I tried to wake up every morning with the attitude that I had to give my all and not hold back because I could die at any minute. However, as Sam has mentioned what if death opens the doors to something even greater than life? I could go on fearing death my whole life because I see life as precious and as what follows death to be less or complete nothingness. I guess what I am trying to say is My Fear of Death would be controlling My Life. Therefore, rather than simply living and loving life—I’d be fearing death. Rather than appreciating life for what it is I’d be comparing it to my ideas of what death could be. The truth is we don’t know what death has to offer any of us; yet it’s out of our control.
I say it’s out of our control because we don’t know what we are going to get: an afterlife, a heaven, a hell, nothingness—we just don’t know. It’s like flipping a coin and being anxious of what the outcome will be. That’s just silly. Regardless we will get heads or tails and we will eventually find out, once the coin lands. In those terms, why be anxious about it? We can’t control what the outcome is. If we want it to be heads being anxious about it won’t better our chances. Either way we get tails(bad) or heads(good), but either way it has to land on one. We have not control over the outcome, so why be anxious about it? Just let the coin land where it may. Let it be. Flip that coin to the best of your ability, but don’t worry about it.
After hearing Sam’s lecture last Thursday it made me feel somewhat more at ease about death. Although it only gave us insight to moments after death at least we know those first few moments will be pleasant and regardless of what you have done in life. That should put some of us at ease; knowing death isn’t something that should be feared. Because like I said, whether we fear or fret or worry about it, it still will be death. It is what it is. I think we should embrace life and live it to the fullest, but also be willing to embrace death gracefully.

I feel that all of these somehow contribute to one’s place in life and where they end in life. However, I have to say that I personally believe determinism has the largest impact followed by free will and lastly biology (which barely contributes). Although I may have a slightly biased opinion because some of the courses I have taken in college so far have been solely focused on sociology or a society’s effect on an individual. Besides straight up sociology courses I am also taking Engl 228 which has given me a new perspective on people with disabilities. For example, people who are considered “normal” may believe that those with disabilities are biologically inferior to them, when in actual reality they may be different but they are not less; in other words its society that is disabling to them. Same goes for race. I don’t believe that anyone is more or less biologically but rather its society that plays a major role in what an individual will accomplish. Free will also comes into play because no individual can become an Olympian overnight without making decisions to do so and having the will power to train and want it enough. Back to the determinism aspect, societies construct allows those who are ahead to stay ahead; or in other words to stick to the status quo. Those in power will use that authority to stay in power. Statistics show that those with disabilities are a lot more likely to live in poverty, why is that? According to a majority of society they are biologically less; or have some defect. Although they may differ biologically from the majority who has the right to decide they have something wrong with them; can’t we just decide they are different? What if employers refuse to hire someone with a disability, although they may be just as capable as a nondisabled person. At this point what disables them; the employer or their impairment? It’s the years and years and history of discrimination against those with disabilities that contributes to this factor moreover than their impairment. Another good example would be how those who are homosexual were once considered to have a disability. What makes someone’s sexual interest a disadvantage in life? It doesn’t. However, by placing them in a group with disabled people (an oppressed group) they suddenly were at a disadvantage—that’s determinism. Another interesting factor about this is no one ever asked, why is being placed with those who have disabilities such a bad thing? Isn’t that discriminatory against them? For this reason I believe that we are all biologically different but no one is better than the next person. However, groups, society, discrimination all contribute to how someone’s life is in a way determined(or at least limited) based on societal structures. Therefore, my order still goes determinism, free will, and then biology.

My reaction to this was similar to the girl’s who stood in front of the class; I felt like a horrible person. Especially because I love clothes, fashion, and shopping. It really put things into perspective for me. I will rethink the complaint, “I have nothing to wear” or the urge to go shopping when I want a new outfit. Although she made a good point that if she were to stop shopping at those stores it wouldn’t make a difference but a huge amount of us would have to, what if all of us cut back on the amount we buy. Realizing that each piece of clothing we bought had some form of slavery involved.
Although I cannot trace my ancestry back to slavery I think I may have insight that can recognize what one would tell his ancestors that could be traced back to slavery. Just to clarify, I am not claiming to know what one thinks, rather I am taking an outside more sociological approach. The status quo and oppression are huge factors on why things are the way they are today. The status quo entails those in power doing everything to keep their power while oppression deals with those who are inferior or viewed in inferior in some way. I believe that today a majority of us are ignorant of the oppressed; including me. Say for example people with disabilities. Why is it that they are view as inferior to others? Could it be possible that they actually feel that their impairments are apart of who they are and they feel that their quality of life is just a high as “normal” peoples’. It’s just a thought. Maybe all that want is to be viewed in the same light as everyone else; their not inferior the human race just has variety. Many of us would not think of this because we are not the oppressed. Until we ask the oppressed how they are feeling or they make us aware of how they feel we may not even realize that they are oppressed. Similar to the slavery that goes into a variety of products sold in America: cell phones and clothing. I know I was ignorant to the fact that this still goes on to this extent. I had heard about sweatshops for Nike and things like that but I didn’t realize to the extent of it. So, those who can trace their ancestry back to slavery and say, “But I like this shirt, or I need a new cell phone,” have a valid factor to back it up, they are not the oppressed so therefore they don’t know what the oppressed are feeling. Similar to those who were slave owners were not oppressed and didn’t know how the slaves felt.

I think this is a very interesting question because the question itself invokes the feeling that everyone can contribute to “make it get better”. In other words, it puts the spotlight on society rather than the individuals who are waiting for it to “get better”. This makes me think that perhaps society has a way of making those who are different seem like they having something wrong with them—not skinny enough, homosexual, have an impairment, not the right race, etc.—when in fact it’s society that has something wrong with it. In order to “make it better” for everyone, including all minorities or those who are oppressed we as a society can make some changes. One is to have an open mind and to have the willingness to see the world from new perspectives. For example, instead of stressing a “normal” and comparing anything and everything to this normal, we could see that the normal may be what occurs most often (in a statistical sense) but it doesn’t mean that if one isn’t in that category of “normal” they need to be fixed. Therefore, I think if society could see that people just come in all different varieities it will eliminate this constant need to view who is inferior and who is superior. Rather than thinking a person with disabilities needs to be more like nondisabled people or that people that are homosexual just need to be like the rest of us, maybe we could see that humanity exists in endless variety; just as animals do. And since it occurs in animals as well it is obviously apart of nature. Normal is a socially constructed word. Something society comes up with and it can’t exist without its opposite; the abnormal. This creates a sense of separation, a sense of us and them. If society could work to eliminate this sense of separation I think it would help “make things get better” for everyone. Another suggestion I have is that people become more aware of the language they use on a daily basis. Using terms like “gay” or “faggot” to mean stupid or dumb is overly discriminatory. Why have we replaced “gay” with “stupid” in our everyday language? How does gay=stupid? This implies that if someone is gay there is something wrong with them. This is not the case at all. Instead of acting scarred or disgusted by someone whose sexuality differs from our own, we could learn to be more accepting. It’s like Sam said in class, “If we try to put ourselves in their shoes, and walk in them—even just an inch—we will have so much more understanding. In today’s society a majority of us our too quick to judge others and come to conclusions even before considering putting ourselves in someone else’s shoes. This needs to stop. We are never going to get anywhere in terms of making everyone feel as though they are accepted and loved just the way they are if we continue this trend. I think a start for us to “make it get better” is just being able to step out of our world and into someone else’s.