The Hidden Problem of Human Trafficking in the United States

Prostitution is one of the U.S.'s many human trafficking operations that are still in effect today

In 1808, the United States outlawed international slave trade.  In 1863, President Lincoln gave the Emancipation Proclamation which freed all slaves in the Union.  In 1865, the Thirteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution and officially abolished slavery.

That was almost 150 years ago.  Yet for some reason, we still don't seem to get it.  The United States still continues to hold markets in human trafficking, which is, in some ways, almost identical to slavery.

But what exactly is human trafficking?  The name really doesn't provide much explanation if you ask me.  Human trafficking is defined by Wikipedia as the illegal trade of human beings for the purposes of reproductive slavery, commercial sexual exploitation, forced labor, or a modern-day form of slavery.

Bam.  There you have it folks, the United States is nothing but one big fat hypocrite.

However, much to my dismay, we can't say that just yet.  Turns out the U.S. has done a lot to support antitrafficking efforts throughout the world.  In 1904, the International Agreement for the Suppression of the White Slave Traffic was created, although very few countries signed it.  Since then, the U.S. has passed many an Act to prevent the continuation of prostitution, forced labor, and other unspeakable horrors.

All of these horrors are, obviously, horrendous.  But if you ask me, the one that poses the biggest problem is prostitution.  You see them everywhere.  Creeping around among the hidden scandals of Governors and Senators.  Downtown at night there they are standing on the corners.  Last month my friend and I were driving through a town about 45 minutes away, and saw prostitutes just standing outside the local movie theater.  They're everywhere.

Many may argue against my claim:  So what if it's an immoral operation?  It's a way for struggling people to make money.  What's so bad about that?

What's bad about it is that it's bad.  It's immoral.  It's disgusting.  It's exactly what we tried to do years ago in freeing the slaves and abolishing slavery.  Although prostitutes don't just work for free, they still are entering a trade in which they are objectified and potentially humiliated.  It's a scummy thing, and it should be ended ASAP.

What I got out of our discussions in Sociology this week is this:  Not all slaves work without pay.  Sometimes, just the mere concept of being objectified and bought is enough to abolish the trade entirely.

Appalachia

The farm house in which we stayed during my week-long mission trip to Appalachia

Two summers ago, I went on a mission trip with a group of kids from my church.  One hot August morning,all 30 of us piled into three vans and drove 6 hours from our church in Barrington to Vanceburg, Kentucky.  The air conditioning in our red van (nicknamed "the Radish") was broken, so the drive felt like an eternity.

The mission trip is commonly known throughout our parish as "Appalachia", a week-long trip during which we would be doing service for the people living in impoverished Northeastern Kentucky. We had expected to do different construction projects, volunteer at food and clothing pantries, maybe mow a lawn or two, but what we witnessed in the course of the following week was nothing like we had expected. Growing up in Barrington is pretty much everyone's dream. The average household income of Barrington residents is huge compared to what most people in America make. Almost all the kids graduate from a fantastic high school and eventually go on to complete four or more years in a good college. Many a famous person has emerged from Barrington (ever heard of the band The Academy Is? How about rapper Kid Slim?) However, the sad part is that most everyone living in Barrington takes it all for granted. We expect the new iPhone for Christmas because, well, we want it. Budgets are practically nonexistent. For the most part, Barrington teenagers are spoiled beyond belief.

So when we went to Vanceburg, we were shocked to say the least. We had known these people were poor, but we didn't expect them to be this poor! To make matters worse, Lewis County had been hit with a devastating flood just weeks earlier, and a big part of the town was in ruins.  When we were told that Lewis County was one of the more relatively lucrative counties in the Appalachian region, we were in disbelief.

Coincidentally, today in class we watched an ABC film about Appalachia (except they pronounced it Appalatcha instead of Appalaysha, which did confuse me for a bit).  They showed people living in trailers, boarded up shacks, even pickup trucks.  To see the level of poverty in which these people were living brought tears to my eyes.  How could so many people in Barrington be living like they are, when there are people only 6 hours away living like this?  I felt like a terrible person.

However, after the film started looking into the lives of some of the residents of Appalachia, my sympathy level dropped a little bit.  So many people in that town were alcoholics, prescription drug addicts, and yes even incestuals.  The majority hadn't even graduated from high school.  Parents would spend their money on Oxycontin and Mountain Dew rather than a dinner for their children.  When it became hard for a family of 6 to put food on the table, one of the 17-year old girls would go and accidentally get pregnant and thus conceive another mouth to feed.  Instead of leaving their houses in Appalachia and seeking employment in the city, they would stay because Appalachia is "their home".  You'd think that by now people would know better, right?

Although I knew these stories were real, I still couldn't help but feel a twinge of upset in my heart when hearing how these people were throwing their lives away.  Yes, many people live in poverty simply because of horrible life choices.  Yes, many parents are young and irresponsible.  However, these statistics could not compete with the personal experiences I had during August of 2010.  The people I met were not drug dealers, the couples I met were not half-siblings, and many people had earned their high school diplomas.  Granted, these people were in a wealthier region than that shown in the ABC film, but I knew from talking to these people and hearing their stories that they were working hard to try and provide a good life for themselves and their families.

What I took away from all of this is that some people are born into poverty so extreme that it is nearly impossible to bring themselves out of it.  No matter how hard they try in school, no matter how naturally gifted they are, sometimes maximum effort just won't cut it.  As sad as this is to accept, it's the truth.  Life has always been this way:  we've heard the old saying the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.  If you have money you want to donate, then by all means donate it!  However, most 99th-percentile people don't donate and won't ever donate, so I don't expect our nation's economic stance to change anytime soon.  The majority of the money going around will always belong to the top few percent, and the poor will be pretty much left for the way they are.

It's sad to think that this could happen in the United States, where all men are created equal and everyone deserves the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  It is in my personal opinion when I say the President who can come along and justly change our massive wealth gap will be the best one we'll ever see.

This Week's Project: Highlights and Lowlights of Disney Analysis Presentations

This week and last week in class, Mrs. Castelli used us as guinea pigs for a new assignment that she just recently came up with because of a conversation we had in class about Disney.  We were to make a presentation (in Powerpoint, Prezi, etc.) analyzing the sociological messages conveyed in Disney's classic movies.  Many groups chose to criticize the messages about gender that the films sent us.  For example:  the skinny waists of Sleeping Beauty's Aurora, the dim wit of Ariel, the unrealistically huge biceps of Hercules.  However, as more and more groups gave their 10-15 minute presentatinos INCLUDING CLIPS, we pretty much got the message and were ready to move on.  One group focused not only on gender stereotypes but on Tarzan and its false representation of human socialization.  As refreshing as that was, I still was extremely bored out of my mind at the majority of the presentations (two groups decided to do Hercules and showed the exact same things).

However, aside from the Tarzan group, the real stars of the project were, in my opinion, Kaitlin and Nicole.  They took a super creative spin on the project by comparing two movies:  Sleeping Beauty and Anastasia.  They did look at the gender stereotypes exhibited in the movie, but the major point of their presentation was to draw attention to the changes made throughout the years.  They saw how, in the late 1950s, Sleeping Beauty was made as the story of a helpless girl relying solely on beauty and singing (a soprano, nonetheless), who finds a man and only sings songs about her prince.  Anastasia (1997), on the other hand, features a heroine rather than a hero (In Sleeping Beauty, Aurora just slept through the whole battle scene); she herself defeated Rasputin, and although she did find a romantic interest in Dimitri,  the songs she sings in an alto voice are about finding herself and establishing her own identity.  In my opinion, this is much better than simply being boy-crazy.

That then got me thinking:  What other movies show the difference betwen the more early times of the twentieth century and the modern values held today?  Mulan certainly put a spin on the classic tales of damsels in distress and huge muscular heroes.  Mulan herself became the hero of China by proving to be just as strong, disciplined, and capable as a man.  Not only that, but she did the whole thing for her family (remember how Ariel ran away from her father, the "ugly stepsisters" in Cinderella, stepmothers in Cinderella and Snow White), which certainly was a much-needed aspect of Disney movies.

Furthermore, I suggest this to my teacher:  Have the project be a timeline or comparison between children's films (not necessarily Disney), and see whether your future students believe society has improved or gotten worse.  After all, there's no real answer to that question, is there?

Male vs. Female, Men vs. Women: It's Not All Black and White

Line 1:  Handsome, Strong, Brave, Buff, Football, Basketball, Jerseys, Jockstraps, Blue.

Line 2:  Pretty, Graceful, Spunky, Hot, Dancing, Cheerleading, Makeup, Bras, Pink.

What did you think of when you read the first line?  How about the second?  Hopefully, your respective answers are something like guys and girls, men and women, or male and female.

It's easy to tell the sex of a person.  Anatomically speaking, males and females are different in some pretty obvious ways.  However, gender isn't always so easily defined.

Traditionally speaking, males (those born with a penis) have the minds of men, and are pretty much summed up using the words in Line 1.  Traditionally speaking, females (those born with a vagina) have the minds of women, and are likewise described using the words in Line 2.

However, as it is with all things in the modern world, we aren't always speaking traditionally now, are we?

Sometimes, the match-up of one's sex and gender isn't male-man or female-woman.  These people are the ones who may eventually become homosexuals, transvestites, or even transgender.  In the article I read this week, Gauging Gender by Stephen T. Asma (of The Chronicle Review), gender is described not as something set in stone; but as a concept created by the evolution of human society.  In other words, we came up with the categorization of the words in Lines 1 and 2 simply because of the way things happened in our society. 

In cultures outside the U.S., there are more extant genders other than man and woman.  In fact, there are at least 23.  We learned about one of these in class this week; fa'afafine are a Samoan third gender and are basically men who were raised to carry a woman's role in society.  These fa'afafine are not considered men, and relations between a male and a fa'afafine are not considered homosexual.  Fa'afafine keep house and raise children.  Here's a picture of one, just for a visual:

*Don't ask me why she's wearing boxing gloves; I don't know.  Whatever.  It's irrelevant.

These fa'afafine are culturally accepted in Samoan society and are actually a pretty innovative and smart idea. If a family gives birth to two boys, they may decide they want a girl to take care of them in their old age, so they decide to raise one of their boys as a fa'afafine.  They treat him like a girl and teach him how to do chores around the house just like his mother.  Because of his natural male strength, however, it is arguable that he is even better at keeping house and doing chores than a typical woman would be.

The Samoan fa'afafine are proof that gender bending is something that can and has been done.  Gender isn't set in stone, and although some natural factors do have an impact on our perception of males and females (males being naturally bigger and stronger, and therefore prone to more aggressive behavior; women being the childbearers and nurturers, and therefore having a more gentle nature), our ideas of how each sex should look, act, speak, and behave is simply something conjured from our own imaginations.

A good friend of mine has a father who recently came out of the closet as a homosexual.  He has undergone some serious and painful medical procedures and injections to turn him into a female.  Although this has obviously been a very difficult thing to handle for my friend and her family, she's doing a good job of accepting her father and his situation simply by acknowledging the point discussed by my class this week as well as the article I read yesterday.  Sometimes a person's sex doesn't match up exactly with how society wants their corresponding gender to be.  If my friend's father had lived in Samoa, his decision to change his sex would have been way more accepted than it is here in the United States, and it probably would have been a lot easier on him (or her...?) than it has been.

Bottom line is, if a male acts "prissy" rather than "manly", or if a female acts "dykish" rather than "girly," don't judge them for it; these perceptions of gender are only illusions made up by people as the years went on.  It isn't a sin to not have a traditional correlation between sex and gender, and those who persecute people who fall into the "confused" category really need to think before they speak.

Do Our Sociodemographic Positions Influence The Way We View Genetics?

Blue-eyed babies are adorable:  I think this is something most of us can agree on.  However, anyone who passed 9th grade science knows that there aren't a whole lot of blue-eyed babies around.  Blue eyes are a recessive trait and are usually overpowered by the dominant brown eye gene (as depicted by the punnett square below).

[Blue eye gene is b; Brown eye gene is B]

Genes work like this, and not only with eye color.  Biological studies prove that pretty much every natural anatomical feature on an individual is there because of their inherited genetics.  However, the question still remains:  does the same go for non-anatomical characteristics?

In other words, are our personalities and abilities controlled by our inherited genetic code?  Would the same punnett square depicted above work if (for example) patience was B and a short temper was b?  An article I read this week for class explains how and why different people hold different opinions on this issue.

The article was written by Sara Shostak of Brandeis University, Jeremy Freese of Northwestern University, Bruce G. Link, and Jo C. Phelan (both of whom are from Columbia University), and says that research has proved the following hypothesis:

American citizens of a more conservative political position and/or an upper- to middle- class status tend to believe genes are the main cause of one's character and personality.  Those of a more liberal political position and/or a lower- to middle- class status tend to believe the contrary:  that one's personality and character is shaped by his or her experiences in life and among society.

When I first read this article, I was dumbfounded.  How could someone find a correlation between these two things?!  I mean, they're totally unrelated, aren't they?

After a little thinking, however, a light bulb went off in my head.

Those of a liberal democratic political position are strong pushers of the notion that "all men are created equal"...hence the tendency to favor taxing the rich and giving to the poor.  Those of a conservative republican political position, however, favor the idea of a capitalistic society as well as that of a "self-made man."

Therefore, if liberals believe all men are created equal, wouldn't this mindset lead to the similar assumption that all babies are born equal and genes have little to do with their natural personalities?  And wouldn't higher-class conservatives have reason to believe themselves to be more naturally advantaged because of a likely genetic history of a good work ethic, an aptitude for learning, and a strong sense of determination that so led to their current state of economic success and high-class social status?

In class, we're learning about how society may or may not shape who we are.  George Herbert Mead's hypothesis of a Social Construction of Self suggests that our personalities and characters are largely influenced by the world in which we live.  Charles Horton Cooley, however, believes in a Looking-Glass Self and thinks that one's view of himself is caused by what he thinks others think of him (...you got that?)  Both these men would most likely be on the side of the liberals when it comes to this argument.  Neither one brings up the idea that genes are why we are who we are (hence why they're sociologists and not geneticists).

As for me, I have to say I agree with the conservative viewpoint.  I have seen in myself many a character trait like one or both of my parents.  I like the same kind of music as my dad and the same foods as my mom, I communicate the same way as my father (my mom's a whole different story), and the same goes for all four of my biological siblings.  Since I'm only 16 and don't really have a fully-developed political position, this is just what I've concluded through personal experience alone.  Therefore, my opinion isn't really one of great contribution to my conclusion above about the article I read.

Still, it's my opinion and I think I'm right.  :)

"Don't Put Your Elbows on the Table!" - Examining A Questionable American Folkway

"Elbows off the table!"

These dreadful words have been spat at me almost every evening for approximately 16 years.  Doing the math, that's almost SIX THOUSAND TIMES that I've heard the command.  And even still, I have no idea why I must keep my elbows off the table.  Sure, I've probably asked a few times.  But the answer I always received never went deeper than "because it's bad manners" or "because I said so".

After doing some research on the topic, I found out the REAL reason why you should keep your arm-knees off of your eating surface at all times.  Apparently, back in the olden days, banquet tables were not as sturdy as they are today, and so if someone put their elbows on the table and leant too heavily, the table could collapse.  And so, people who committed such a dangerous crime were sanctioned in a very negative way.  Also, common sense tells us that elbows can easily knock over drinks, so I guess there's Reason #2.

However, the question I still have is WHY ON EARTH CAN'T I PUT MY ELBOW ON THE TABLE?!  Being a dedicated student and athlete, dinnertime is probably the point during my day when I am most likely to drop dead of exhaustion.  When sitting at the table eating dinner, my neck often feels it needs a break from having to hold up my big brain all the time.  And so I will casually rest my elbow on the table, place my beautiful face in my upward-faced palm, and feel such comfort, relaxation, and happiness as I let gravity do all the work.  I can hardly describe the euphoria.

And then it comes.  The death stare.  Either from my mother or father (more often than not my father).  A look of complete disapproval.  Eyebrows lowered, bottom eyelids slightly raised, jaw clenched ever so slightly. 

"Elbows off the table!"

Why does he care so much anyway?!  Our table is sturdy enough to withstand the puny force of my one elbow.  In fact, everyone in my family could have their elbows up if they so desired.  And as for knocking things over, the only thing within range of my elbow is my half-glass of milk, and to be honest that's a chance I'm willing to take.

Then it hits me.  Back some thirty years ago, my dad was in the exact same spot I'm in; my grandfather at the head of the table.  The exact same scenario most likely occurred many a time with my father, and so he believes he must do the same for his children.  Such a cultural folkway is in existence solely by sheer familial pass-it-down ways.  My father was brought up to believe an elbow-free table is a happy table, and my guess is that my grandfather learned it from his father and so on.

So if we can't blame it on my father, and we can't blame it on his father, who can we blame it on?  The answer is simple:  America.

Leave it to America to keep such a stupid, inconvenient folkway alive after so long.  In class this past week, we've been talking about culture and learning how each different culture carries a different set of values, morals and folkways.  Some made sense at one point (doing "cheers" at dinner http://www.snopes.com/food/rituals/clink.asp, shaking hands when meeting someone http://disciplinedcreativity.blogspot.com/2009/02/why-do-we-shake-hands-with-people.html, etc.) but should now be considered obsolete, and do not provide themselves as anything more than a simple nuisance to tired people (cough cough no elbows on the table cough cough).

Personally I'm against it completely, and I will pass around a petition tomorrow during class that will thus allow any and all elbows to roam freely to whatever dining surface they so desire whenever they so desire.  Sign it if you agree.

"Exchange Student" Chagnon Among the Yąnomamö

It must be scary to be a foreign exchange student in the United States.  I admit that I myself have close to no experience with foreign exchange studentship, but I can only imagine how completely terrified out of my pants I would be if ever put in such a situation.  I mean, think about it.  You've lived your whole life in someplace like Spain, Germany, Russia, or Australia...and all of a sudden you fly over alone to someplace as crazy as America.  As busy as America.  As complicated as America.  As alien as America...and you're expected to conform to society ASAP.  But what if you don't know what fork to use for your salad?  What if you don't know how to eat salad?  What if you don't even know what salad is?  By our standards, you may as well be culturally doomed.

I read an article today about an Anthropologist by the name of Napoleon A. Chagnon, a man who spent nineteen months in a situation not unlike that of a foreign exchange student.  However, his experience was probably a million times more scary and intense, as Yąnomamö culture is so different than that of the rest of the world.

As you can see from the photograph above, the Yąnomamö people look very different from us.  They wear barely any clothes, no shoes, and most have facial piercings that look like this:

Ouch.  How strange this must have seemed to Chagnon!  The culture in which he lived for nineteen months was one with what seems like no similarities to that of the United States.  And what's worse is that he had to adapt and try his hardest to fit in.  As you can very well predict, that was not easy.  Everywhere he went, he received stares from the Yąnomamö people.  They seldom talked to him, and when they did it was solely in the hope that he would share his food with them.  It goes without saying that Mr. Chagnon must have felt like a complete outsider among these people.

In class this week, we finished watching a documentary on the Lost Boys of Sudan.  One of the Lost Boys, Peter, was flown in to Houston from his home village in Africa and was "given" an opportunity to live in the United States and to find work, education, and eventually money.  Shortly after his arrival, Peter decided to move to Kansas City and enroll in High School, where he more or less acted as a foreign exchange student.  From what I saw in the video, Peter's experiences in High School are very similar to those of Mr. Chagnon.  Both Peter and Chagnon felt a strong surge of culture shock when they first arrived to their new homes, and were treated as the outcasts that they felt they were.

The main reason why i took particular interest in the concept of being the "new kid" in a new environment is because I have been exactly that.  Four times.  Moving from school to school can be hard, even if it's just from one part of the country to another.  Everywhere in the world has its own culture, whether it be a town, city or entire nation.  Being in an unfamiliar place always comes with a case of culture shock and creates symptoms like discomfort, homesickness, confusion, and external exclusion.  Peter, Mr. Chagnon, and myself all know what these feel like.  And even though they immediately are very negative feelings, they always end up turning into a very enriching and amazing life experience.

Looking At Things Ethnocentrically - A Reflection on Dr. Richard Nisbett's 2000 Study

This week, I read the article How Culture Molds Habits of Thought.  Basically, this entire article was about social construction of reality and how prevolent it is around the world today.  However, it also focused on the theory of cultural construction of perception and thought patterns.  Or, in other words, how culture helps shape the way we think.  Mind blowing, isn't it?  From such a young age, we were taught that each and every one of our brains is special.  Completely unique and undeniably brilliant.  We are who we are and no one will ever be able to change that.  No one except society, that is.

The article discussed a study conducted by a social psychologist at the University of Michigan.  Dr. Richard Nisbett believes that "people who grow up in different cultures do not just think about different things: they think differently."  He decided to conduct an experiment and test his hypothesis.

Through his trials of showing a series of images to people of different cultures, seeing how they described them.  Let's use the Japanese vs. American trial as an example, shall we?  When shown an image of a large fish swimming in a not-too-simple, yet not-too-complex setting, the Japanese person described the background first, not really concentrating on what would seem to be the focal point of the image (the fish).  The American, on the other hand, described the fish's size, appearance, shape and location first, probably focusing on what they thought to be the center of attention.

I found this to be insanely intriguing, as we did something much like that in class this week.  We did an activity where we were paired off, and one partner sat facing the Smartboard and one sat with their back turned to it.  An image appeard on the board.  Then, my partner (who was facing the board) had to describe the image to me while I tried to draw it.  The way my partner described the image to me was much like how the American in Dr. Nisbett's experiment described the image of the fish.  She focused on the main focal points of the image and quite accurately described their shape and relative size and location, not really focusing on the image as a whole (as the Japanese would seemingly do).

The funny thing is, however, that we won the contest as to who had the most accurate depiction.  We were almost dead-on, which got me thinking: Did Emily use the best way to describe the image to me?  It would seem so, looking at the results we got compared to the rest of the class.  However, if our way truly was what Dr. Nisbett would call "The American Way", then wouldn't that mean our way is superior to the other methods used?

Whether it is or it isn't, one thing is certain: ethnocentrism is all around us.  Whether we look at things the American way or the Japanese way, we will always think our way is better.  I confess to it!  Each and every day, I do the things I do because I think it's the best.  So whenever somebody asks me what I see in this picture (the one up at the top of this post), I will loudly, proudly, and ethnocentrically say "There is a world.  It's blue and green and has lots of glare..." and I will continue to ignore that annoying Japanese person sitting next to me trying to convince me there's an eyebrow somewhere in the corner.  I don't see it, do you??

Eating Your Friends (in Starbucks) Is the Hardest

Over the Andes the plane flew into a thick cloud, and the pilots had to fly by instrument.  Amid the turbulence they hit an "air pocket," and the plane suddenly plunged 3,000 feet.  When the passengers abruptly found themselves below the cloud, one young man turned to another and said, "Is it normal to fly so close?"  He was referring to the mountainside just 10 feet off the right wing.

So yesterday I read this article.  It's called Eating Your Friends Is the Hardest.  Intriguing name, right?  Well it just so happens that this article I had to read for my Sociology class was actually (dare I say it) INTERESTING.  Now, I don't mean that in the cliché student-writing-an-essay-about-a-reading-assignment way: I seriously mean it.  The article was about the survivors of the F-227 plane crash in 1971, and their desperate and controversial resort to cannibalism.  And come on, what could be more interesting than cannibalism?  Especially when you're sitting in Starbucks.  And you just ate a ham-and-egg breakfast sandwich, which you are currently trying to prevent from coming back up.  And the guy sitting behind you is without a doubt taking peeks at your strange choice in reading and is staring you down with an extremely judging and disgusted look.  Oh, what a morning!

I think I'll begin my analysis of the article with a simple yet powerful question: What is cannibalism?  In the literal sense, it is quite obviously the consumption of human flesh.  In today's society, it has been dubbed as disturbing, disrespectful, and inhumane: Generally speaking, cannibalism is frowned upon in almost every culture in today's world.  In other words, the Symbolism (one of three main sociological perspectives we're learning about in class) of cannibalistic behaviors causes the vast majority of people to become naysayers when confronted with the idea.  However deserving of these labels and stigmata may cannibalism be, the survivors of the plane crash of '71 were somehow able to overcome them, and instead activated their logical minds for their desperate desire for survival.

Having to make a decision so terrifying as eating people for survival is just about the epitome of hard decisions.  Of course, some were unable to overcome the initial sense of moral insecurity and gag reflux-inducing repulsion.  These individuals, of course, were the first ones to pass away and become food for those who could more easily stomach the people-meat.  This is a perfect example of a Conflict Perspective, which we have been discussing in class this week.  Those individuals who could eat the human meat of their deceased companions were able to live longer and eventually be rescued.  However, those others who were unable to stomach the meat stood no chance, and soon became a frozen dinner. 

In class, we just finished watching an episode of Freeks and Geeks, and this concept of "Survival of the Fittest", or "Conflict Over Scarce Resources" comes up a lot.  Coincidentally, it can easily be related to this week's reading about the plane crash.  For example, in Freeks and Geeks, the nerdy kids (the non-cannibalistic plane survivors) try to gain the scarce resource of power (food/survival), but are unable because they lack the strength (the ability - whether physical, mental, or spiritual to eat human flesh) to meet the same power level as the bullies (the cannibalistic survivors).  However, the bullies (those who ate the corpses) were the ones who eventually won the fight (survived and were rescued).

Despite the grotesque nature of this article, I cannot express enough just how much I loved reading it.  This whole story kind of revolves around the idea of the ultimate "would you rather" question: Either eating your friend and having your choice nag on your conscience forever, or choosing to die and neglecting your body the nutrition it needs to survive.  This reminds me of some of the compromises I make with myself every day.  Today, in particular, I was feeling sick and was given the suggestion by the nurse to go home and rest.  However, I had to choose between heeding her advice and missing a swim practice (I only get 3 excused before I'm off the team), or accepting my obligation to the team and attending what I knew was going to be a hard practice and probably was going to make me feel even worse than before. I chose to go to practice but, as in the story of the plane crash survivors, mine ended happily.  Because almost half the team was out sick and everyone was tired, my coach decided to be merciful and let us out of practice an hour and a half early!  So I guess for today you could call Coach Bart my "rescue-copter".  For him, I am very thankful.  Maybe almost as thankful as the plane crash survivors were when they were rescued from the Andes!

The Sociological Umbrella

At almost two weeks into the school year, and already I'm feeling the weight of sociology beginning to sink in.  Before school started, I thought I had a pretty good idea as to what sociology is.  Sociology is technically defined as "the study of society", right?  What I learned over my 8 days in class, however, was that sociology isn't just about "society", it's about OUR society.  It's about how it changes.  It's about how it compares to other societies.  However, most of all, it's about society's relationship with US.  After all, we are the ones who shape society.  But then again, society shapes us as well, doesn't it?

Keeping into account the cyclical relationship between society and humankind, the only conclusion I can personally come up with is this:  Our society is a living, breathing thing. Growing and changing constantly, it has quickly become one of the most top-visited topics on my mind.

So I read this article by James M. Henslin, entitled What Is Sociology?:  Comparing Sociology and the Other Social Sciences.  I have to admit, it wasn't as fun as I had imagined a sociological article to be.  However, it did help put things into perspective.  One thing in particular really caught me by surprise:  I hadn't really thought about sociology having relatives.  Anthropology, economics, government, linguistics, the list goes on and on.  However, these relatives aren't brothers and sisters, but more like sons and daughters.  Sociology is kind of like an umbrella which covers all of the social sciences.  After all, society encompasses everything. 

This umbrella analogy really helped me understand sociology's vast role in the universe.  As it is ever-lingering over our world and all its contents, it is also being held up by mankind, as well as keeping him dry.  Hence the cyclical relationship between mankind and society.

When I think of an umbrella, I think of water.  I find this somewhat funny as my entire life revolves around water right now.  I spend at least 4 hours every day swimming in it, I drink about a gallon of it a day because of my constant swimming, and of course water also represents the millions of tears I've shed into my goggles because I can't believe I'm actually doing Varsity Swimming for yet another season.  Why do I do this to myself?  I don't know.  I guess because I want to be in-shape (sociology right there - the standard expectations for body image!), because I like the people on the team (social, without a doubt), and because it gives me peace of body, soul, and mind.  On that note, I will conclude this post with a goodbye.  That's all folks!

About Me

Hey there world!  So since this blog is brand-spankin' new, I think I'm going to post a little snippet of info for y'all...sort of an "All About Me".  I've never blogged before, and this blog was created primarily as an assignment by my Sociology Teacher, Mrs. Castelli.  Throughout the course of this semester I will be posting things of a Sociological nature:  most likely assignments by my teacher.  However, I do plan to have as much fun as possible with this blog and I promise I'll try to make it as interesting as possible!

So what was I supposed to be posting about?  Oh yeah, an "All About Me"...well I'm a Junior in High School and I currently reside in the lovely town of Barrington, Illinois.  I am 5'8", I have brown hair and am about as caucasian as a person can get.  I'm a varsity swimmer and water polo player, as well as a lifeguard at my local pool, a swim team coach and swim lessons instructor.  I spend my free time doing homework (sometimes...), hanging out with friends, and/or eating.  I LOVE FOOD. Seriously, it's probably my most favorite thing in the world.  Every day when I'm sitting in class or swimming a million laps at practice, all I can think about is what I want to eat when I get home.  Pizza with extra cheese.  Ice cream with extra cookie dough.  Chips with extra guac.  Chicken with extra "fried".  Banana bread with extra butter. I love it all.

I also love art, and in all forms.  I'm what some may call a Music Junkie:  I love finding new music, quickly falling in love with it, eventually growing sick of it, and repeating the process.  I try to draw in my free time, but whether or not i create a masterpiece or a piece of poo is pretty much 50/50 and up in the air.  Oil pastel is my strongest and most favorable media, and I absolutely adore the works of Georgia O'Keefe.

Jesus.  He is my most favorite guy ever.  That's all I have to say about that.

So now that you know my motive for blogging, basic demographics, hobbies and biggest unhealthy obsession...let's get this show on the road! :)