Blog #9: Fitting In

I loved this unit's readings. Mostly because the age group we all are planning to teach (6th- 12th grade) all of those students are dealing with the struggles of fitting in and how their peers are going to perceive them. We've all gone through times like this where we want so desperately to fit into the "cool" group that we will change our total outward appearance in order to do so. Looking back, I didn't realize that this is what I was doing, but now it is so apparent. It makes me sad that kids think that they can't embrace their individuality because it won't be considered "cool", I wish there was some way to make students understand that just because the popular kids think it's cool doesn't automatically mean that you should follow suit.

First of all, teens rate their coolness on their appearance, meaning that they take a lot of time into thinking about what they wear on their body. The "Merchants of Cool" video expressed how the teen age group is the hardest to market to because it is hard as adults to know what they like and what they don't. I literally had no idea that they would send out people to look for hipsters and to see what the next fashion style will be. It was kind of funny actually, just the way they marketed it - having older people trying to live like they are young and find the newest "cool" fashion. I guess someone has to do it, right? Never thought of it before, but I guess it makes sense. This leads to the Abercrombie and Fitch scandal. Which just purely pisses me off - makes me so mad that a CEO would claim that they don't want ugly or fat people working for their company. What kind of business is that? I remember when I was in middle school and I thought that if you shopped at Abercrombie it was cool - I thought it made me feel older and much more stylish. Yeah, I think their clothes are cute and all, but just their reputation and not to mention the price of those clothes is just so not even worth it. Sorry, middle schoolers it's just not worth it. And I totally support that guy in giving all my Abercrombie clothes to the homeless!

Macklemore's "Wings" song and video hits the nail on the head by relating kids identifying themselves through materialistic things.  A line that stuck out to me was "We are what we wear". It is true, middle schoolers really do believe that - unfortunately. Even though Macklemore isn't condoning this, he is simply bringing to light that this is the problem our teenagers face. I really thought the Spike Lee video with Michael Jordan was the cherry on top for this unit's readings because it proved that the shoes don't make a difference. And this carries a lot of weight because it comes from the greatest basketball player in the world, Michael Jordan himself. This would be a great video to show kids because it makes them realize that what you wear doesn't make you cooler or better at something than someone that doesn't have them. The short story "The Jacket" relates perfectly to "Wings" because it is the same concept of kids thinking that clothing defines them and their level of popularity. This kid, who I found a little ungrateful, was so mad at his mom for buying him such an ugly jacket that he blamed the jacket for his crappy years in school...doesn't really make all that much sense. But I guess speaking from a mind of a middle schooler it is.

As for my "street style" I am considered 'simply relaxed' meaning that fashion wise - I know what I like and what I don't like and I don't necessarily go for the WOW Factor with my clothing, but still look good. I would say that this quiz was pretty accurate with my style of clothing, I am really relaxed and like to be comfy. I am curious to know what the other results were!

Blog #8: Animals

Animals are a huge part of our lives - most of us treat our pets like they are humans and one of the family. But we also get a huge amazement from wild animals. They are so exotic and intimidating that we can't help but be intrigued by them. However, a common theme that these readings made me realize was that despite our love for animals, we treat them pretty shitty. We capture them and put them in cages and if we don't like them then we just dump them off at the pound like they are someone else's problem. I really think that if everyone took responsibility and treated animals with the respect that they deserve our world would be a much better place for all to live.

To start off, the huge fish that have gone extinct - or supposedly have gone extinct - were because of humans. Pyramid Lake in Nevada is known for these huge fish, which makes for good fishing. But, fishing was not what made these fish disappear, it was the pollutions and chemicals that we put into the water that made these fish die out. My question is if we knew that these huge and rare fish were living here (or any other fish for that matter) why put harmful chemicals in there at all? Was it really helping anything by doing that? This is just one example of many species forced into extinction by man.

This brings me to my next point: zoos. Yeah, I'll admit they are fun and a good use of time and money to go. But, does anyone ever think of what it must be like for those animals? I just think if someone put me in a confined area for the rest of my life how awful that would be. I do believe that they are well taken care of at the zoos and such but that fact that they are stuck in a small area just kills me. Many animals are like Tillacum (sp?) the orca whale act aggressively towards humans when they are held in captivity. Interestingly enough, the trailer for "Blackfish" mentioned that orca whales don't usually attack humans in the ocean (which I thought they did). This shows that by being cooped up they build aggression and then attack. I just trace this all back to humans - the three deaths caused by this particular whale could have all been completely avoided if he had been left to live his life like it was intended; wild and free. The gorilla story, "Primal Compassion"is another depiction of humans treating a caged animal poorly. After the mother gorilla cares for the small boy who ended up in her caged area - which I totally was not expecting her to be nice and loving to him - the zookeepers come in and spray her and the others with huge hoses to ward them away from the child. Talk about confusing for the gorilla, she just did a good deed and now they are punishing her? Another example of how humans treat these animals like dirt. She could have killed that kid, but she didn't instead she took care of as if it were her own. Just doesn't add up to me.

On a different note, animal abuse is not only happening in zoos where they are captured, but in factories as well. The gaming advertisement "The Scarecrow"depicts how poorly treated animals are in these conditions as well. In one scene it showed the cow in a tin box getting milked by a machine and a chicken being forced to lay eggs. I am not a vegetarian or anything, and don't get me wrong I do really enjoy animal byproducts, but there has got to be a better way to go about these things.

Cats are another problem, especially at my house because my dad can't stand all the feral cats in the neighborhood and he is definitely the type to call animal control on them. I really enjoyed the article "Don't fear the Feral" because I could totally relate to it since we have a lot of stray cats where I live. I had never thought of going down and bringing them to the shelter to get them neutered. I think it is a great idea, but I am skeptical because how many people are actually going to do that? And spend their money to get it spayed? Not many. This problem can be related back to humans, part of the reason there are so many stray cats is because people decide to get a cat then they don't want it anymore so they just dump it off somewhere and this starts the cycle of the cat living outside and mating with other stray cats to produce even more stray cats. This leads to more animals that are struggling to survive without loving homes. Again, if people would take the responsibility and properly take care of their animals then this problem would not be as big of an issue as it is now.

On a happier note, "Rikki-Tikki" was a cute story of a pet mongoose who saves a family from the evil cobras. This story represents how animals are loyal to their owners, and it made me realize how loyal my animals are to me and my family as well. Animals are important parts of our lives and we are an important part in theirs as well - they treat us well so we need to do the same.

Got to admit that I wasn't sure where "And Tango Makes Three" fit in with all of this. However, I thought it was a sweet story and really dumb that school districts and parents threw a fit about having it in the school libraries. Seems a little overboard to me. I am looking forward to the discussion to see what other people thought of these readings (this on in particular!).

Blog #7: Prince and the Pauper

Wow, I can definitely see how this will be a controversial discussion. Lots of deep stuff in these readings. There are two sides to everything and with this particular topic - I can see both sides and sympathize with them as well.

To start off, fast food workers get a bad rap. We automatically judge (if you are not in high school or college) them by assuming that they are of low class. I admit, I do assume that. Statistics show in the article, "Why US Taxpayers Pay $7 million a Year to Help Fast Food Workers" that 52% of fast food workers are on public assistance programs such as food stamps or insurance. Is this a stereotype if it is true? This article also touched on the fact that even though many of these workers have very low income, they typically tend to have a lot of children. Now, I am not here to tell people that they can and can't have kids, but to me - speaking from a financial standpoint - it doesn't make sense to do that. Why would you have more kids if you can't even feed/support the ones you have? Just a thought. That may sound harsh, but not as harsh as the commenter for the article, "Pay Fast Food Workers Sufficient Wages". This person claims that fast food jobs are primarily meant for high school and college students and stressed that it is NOT a career. They also said that if they should stop complaining about minimum  wage - if you don't make enough get a different job or move so you can actually afford rent. I do agree that fast food jobs are typically meant for adolescents, however I give the older people that work there credit. At least they have a job and are trying to make some money instead of sitting at home and living off government assistance. This brings me to the next article, "Show Respect for Fast Food Workers with Sufficient Pay". I truly admired the man who worked construction and fast food - he has a good work ethic and is really making an effort to provide for his family. He fights for his rights and proves that not all fast food workers are dead beats. He is breaking the stereotype. In my opinion, this is okay for an older person to work at fast food, because they are trying and working hard.

One thing I truly believe in is that money does NOT equal happiness. However, the chart "Money and Happiness"contradicts that. They claim that the more money you make the happier you are. I highly disagree and that unfortunately says a lot about our society - that we actually think that money will make us happy. How materialistic is that? Not something I believe in at all. This in a way ties in with Mark Twain's "Million-Pound Bank Note"- Henry is much happier when he is granted money or at least that is what I took away from it. People also viewed him much differently For example, I doubt that Portia would not have even given him a chance if he didn't have money. And that's how society is - we associate money with happiness and success. In a way it is true, but in many ways it is not. Everyone views success differently. We even judge people based on how much money they make. For example, the movie "Trading Places". Once Eddie Murphy's character (was it random that he was black - is it insinuating that blacks are usually poor?) was of higher status they treated him differently and vice versa with Dan Ackyroid (sp?) and his character.

I really feel that the "Inequality for All" trailer brought together everything. It shows that the U.S. has the widest distribution of salaries than any other country. With that being said, why is there so much judgement and prejudice to those who make very little money? I think that if they are putting in the effort to go out and get a job then good for them. They are taking their lives in their hands and not anyone else's and that is something that I admire.

I am looking forward to this controversial discussion and seeing what others have to say about it.

Blog #6: Man vs. Man

The overarching themes for all of these readings were: men killing each other or themselves. This is what young boys are taught though - that to be manly you must hunt and play a gruesome sport like football. Because that is what men do. Women, on the other hand, are not taught either of these things. Women aren't even allowed to play football (unless you consider Powderpuff, but that is purely a joke).   And as a result of men being taught that the manlier you are the better is violence. We are seeing that more and more. I think this can be traced back to football. The purpose of that game? To push and shove and tackle your opponent to the ground. Basically, organized mob fight (not really - but to an extent). Javon Belcher is a perfect example of how violence can be correlated with football. He was a professional football player who shot and killed his girlfriend and then himself. Now, I would like to believe that he had some brain damage from football that made him commit such a violent act - not that that would make it okay in any way though. I also agree with Bob Costas when he makes the claim that  people are allowed to own guns, but there needs to be more regulations. If anyone can get their hands on a gun then it makes the probability of something like Belcher's story more likely. People kill people and they make the conscious choice to shoot the gun and I hate it when people try and justify it by saying that they were mentally unstable or something like that - to me that does not make any difference.

But for the sake of this post, let's just say that Javon Belcher was mentally unstable. Does football have anything to do with that? In the article, "Dying to Play" it is proven that blunts to the head that occur on a regular basis in the game of football causing long term head injuries that result in diseases such as Alzeihmer's and Dementia and other brain damaging diseases that can make a person not themselves at all. Another disease, that is very rare (although occurring more and more in football athletes), is Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy - CTE - where a protein known as Tau eats away slowly at the blood vessels and eventually decreases your brain size by half. The brain becomes brittle and kills all nerve cells. This brings up the question, despite all of these harmful things that centers around football such as violence and long term head injuries - is it worth it? Is it worth taking your life in your hands or others lives in your hands just to be manly?

Going along with the violence act and how men are taught to be violent at times - and that is is okay - football is not the only way that they are taught to be manly. Hunting is another way. As told in the story, "Most Dangerous Game" General Zaroff takes pleasure in hunting. Hunting men. He views it as a game as if he is hunting deer rather than murder and killing a fellow human being. It is quite sickening. However, it was great when Rainsford outsmarted him in the end. The idea of killing fellow men can also be related to race as well. We have seen countless stories of discrimination that results of man killing man. For example, the story of Emmett Till, the young black kid who was killed for "flirting" with a white woman. Or the countless lynchings of other black people. It's as if they get a thrill from killing. The "9 Rules for the Black Birdwatcher" was a sarcastic, yet true way to tell people how blacks are discriminated against. For example, don't wander too long in the park at night or else white officials will suspect something is up. All in all, it is wrong - to kill to discriminate and to enforce and encourage violence with things such as football or hunting.

So I have to admit that I had a really hard time seeing where the Chris Rock video came into play. Does it have to do with a lot of black people playing football? Golf is primarily a rich, white sport and is that the point the Chris Rock was trying to make? That one through a curveball at me and I am interested to see what other people interpreted it as.

*I don't have anything against football, I love watching it on TV with my family and going to games, but just for the sake of this post I made it sound like I didn't approve of it. Although, I do understand that there are many health risks that come along with playing such a high contact sport.*

Blog #5: Superheroes

We all grew up watching cartoons of the common superheroes...Batman, Superman, Spiderman, were always a treat to watch. But never did I ever think to myself "hmm, all these superheroes are white". It was just at known fact. People don't think twice about it...until now. When I think of Superman, I think something along the lines of the comic "Superman and the Jumper" , with Superman saving the poor, distressed woman on top of a building ready to take her own life, and clearly the person she needs is Superman to save her. But what if these hunky superheroes were of a different race? Would we think differently of them? Some suggest yes. In the articles, Who Gets to be a Superhero and What if X-Men were black? touch on this subject. They both discuss how people have always imagined and pictured their favorite superheroes as white, wealthy, Christian, and able-bodied men. And who is to blame them because that is how they are ALWAYS portrayed. Marvel claims that X-Men is supposed to loosely represent Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X and it deals with many societal problems in the comic such as the genocide of 16 million mutants and the spread of the Legacy Virus that only targets those that are mutants such as the X-Men (a reference to the AIDS spread and people of the LGBT community). However, people claim that this reinforces inequality. With the X-Men fighting crime against a white government it seems more do-able than if a group of black teenagers were fighting the same government it would seem much more of a stretch (inferring that blacks are inferior to whites). The article Who Gets to be a Superhero also admitted that comics target young boys because apparently young boys buy more toys than girls. How much more selective can they be? Young boys, white males, wealthy, strong. Anything outside of these descriptions doesn't matter. The article Meet the New Muslim-American Green Lantern is taking a step out of these specific descriptions of the typical superhero. They are making the first ever Muslim big-name superhero. Interestingly enough, his first battle is to face a federal agent who thinks he is a terrorist. I admire that they are taking a step out of the norm, but aren't they kind of taking a step back as well? They are playing right into the Muslim-American stereotype - people thinking they are terrorists. I am not sure how this will go over, but I am interested to see how it is perceived.

And why are all the superheroes male? The only female superhero that I can think of is Wonder Woman. Female superheroes are very rare. Originally, the comic book companies wanted to undermine the role of women (as stated in Superheroines, Fighters, and Why isn't there a Wonder Woman movie?). Why is that? My guess is that people don't want to see a heroine, they would rather see a male being the protagonist. However, as time goes on we have been seeing many more female leads. Films such as Charlie's Angels, Bionic Woman, and The Hunger Games have all had female heroines. Times are changing and we need to steer clear of that typical Superhero identity.

The King Arthur material was an interesting aspect to think about as well. In the time of King Arthur, they didn't have Superman, Spiderman, or Batman to look up to. Their forms of superheroes were their kings and queens. I got the sense that in the story of King Arthur, it was presented as much more noble (because he pulled the sword out of stone. However, his conception wasn't all that noble. His father deceived his mother and got her pregnant. Is that something to look up to? Not in today's standards...or even their standards back then. I bet you anything that society back then didn't know of this, I think that if they did know of this it would not go over well. This shows that not all of our "superheroes" are perfect...they all have some flaws. In contrast to the way King Arthur was portrayed in the clips of Camelot and Monty Python, it seemed much more relaxed. Not as, noble, I guess one would say. Monty Python portrayed him as not well known - since the peasants refused to listen to his orders and were unfamiliar with his name.

All in all, despite the stereotypes of superheroes, everyone has one and they come in all shapes, sizes, gender, and social classes. We need to step away from the norm and not stereotype what a superhero should or should not look like.

Blog #4: Back to the Future

There are a couple themes that I noticed throughout these readings, podcasts, and videos. For one, they all in some way shape or form had to do with a bigger aspect of a controlling government or authority - something that many people fear will happen to our society we live in today. And this is not a new fear. There are traces of many books and movies in the past that have been relevant to the whole dystopian society concept. The web-image that displayed all the literature is a prime example that people have had this in their mind, and even feared it. Many of the books on the list were classics: 1984, Brave New World, Fahrenheit 451, and V for Vendetta. These books are still read in today's literature classes in high school. Now kids are reading them for fun. The Hunger Games and The Divergent Series are some of the newest fads in Young Adult Literature today. Why is this? Is it because we are fascinated by this type of lifestyle (not living it just reading about it)? Or is it because we feel that it is so far fetched that maybe our society really isn't that far off from it?

These questions go hand in hand with our obsession with zombies. The Walking Dead is one of the most popular zombie productions ever made. Maybe we like them (just like the books) because they scare us a little bit - it is out of the norm to think this way. People are always trying to break out of their everyday lives - we need that escape. What I found interesting was the fact that the narrator in the PBS short film " Why Do We Love Zombies?" was that he brought up the fact that maybe the reason people like zombies is because we like to associate them with scary things in today's world. Like technology. Now whether or not that is true the deeper issue here is that these zombies overtaking society, in a sick way, represents issues such as terrorism, communism, and the economic collapse. Therefore, reverting back to an overruling government.

One thing that I wish people would understand is that even though we read about these controlling governments or things that could potentially symbolize them is the fact that this is a potential problem for us. And we are not in any way shape or form the first people to discover or think this. The proof is in the literature and the films that have been produced in the past. A new idea that I have never heard before was the story of Harrison Bergeron and how he was taken away from his parents because he showed too much potential of being smart and possibly out smarting the system. His poor father can't even get a thought strung together before a sharp noise goes off in his ear every 20 seconds because he was titled "handicap" (which is the exact opposite of our definition of a handicap). What if that is us in "x" amount of years? I fear that soon our newscasts will reflect that of the "Night of Vale". The whole podcast was basically warnings to the public - stay away from the dog park, don't talk to the hooded figures in the dog park, warnings about angel spottings, and even ghost cars on the freeway. I hope that we will not live in a society where all we have to report are warnings. What was interesting was the fact that everyone was skeptical of Carlos the scientist and he was the only one who was trying to solve the problem instead of being fearful 24/7.

We have seen controlling governments throughout history - they usually favor some particular group of people over the others. Hitler, for example, hated Jews. In the Hunger Games, the Capitol favored the rich people and pitied the poor. I think that the short clip from the classic horror film portrays just this. In the very last scene the officials are trying to overcome the zombies and they shoot without hesitation. Meaning that they shot an innocent black man (who was not yet turned into a zombie). I know this was during the time where segregation was still an issue - so does this mean that this was the filmmakers was of showing who needs to be killed off? Are they trying to portray the black man and the zombie as the same kind of "evil"? Just some things to think about and things that popped into my mind while thinking about these units.

Blog #3: Just Dreamin'

Class division and social status are two main themes throughout these readings. Some were harsher than others and some were just a realization of how sad our society has become. While reading "The House on Mango Street" I was introduced to a lot of things that I was not particularly aware of. Rape, abuse, control, and downgrading women. All things that happen, unfortunately, on a daily basis and are things that I just don't think about. So when I was reading this book, I really paid close attention to how the author wrote the story. She did not just come out and say that these things were happening, we had to infer them. It's like real life in that way, people who are victims of such things don't come out and talk about them. Other than that, this book does a fantastic job of showing how a low income, hispanic neighborhood functions. Esperanza,  a young resident of Mango Street, is ashamed of her house. She has much bigger dreams of living a high class life - I mean who doesn't? She is always thinking of the future...what house are they going to live in next? Will it be nicer than the beat up bungalow they live in now? I think that this stems from insecurity. I peg her to be around middle school age, a tough age in general, let alone she is struggling with her hispanic heritage, social economic status, and looks. Throughout the book it seems as if she is having an identity crisis, she doesn't know really who she is or what she stands for. She wants to essentially live the "American Dream", to have a nice home, loving family, nice neighborhood where you don't have to worry about your neighbor (Sally in particular) getting abused or raped. She wants to live a happy, carefree life. And it's a shame that her family's social status has to hold them back from that.

This brings me to my next point. In the article, "For Poor, Leap to College Often Ends in a Hard Fall." The title could not be more accurate of the article. While reading this, I genuinely felt bad for Angelica, Bianca, and Melissa. They, like Esperanza, grew up in a minority, low income household. All three ended up attending college, but not necessarily succeeding at it. I think that a big problem for this is because they were too worried about how they were going to pay for it to really get the fun college experience. This article shows that low income families (like the ones in the article) - maybe education just isn't a top priority (to the parents) therefore, they don't save for it. Both the article and "The House of Mango Street"show low income families and the areas they come from. The areas they come from made a huge impact on their lives - it's as if the schools did not want them to succeed, like they were a lost cause. I think that the article is the non - fiction version of the story and "House on Mango Street" is the fictional version...either Angelica, Bianca, or Melissa could have grown up like Esperanza...wanting and wishing for something more out of life.

Chris Rock's skit was a good, light-hearted way to laugh about a deep issue. He pointed out that white neighborhoods typically don't have signs named after black people. I guess that's true. So as a joke - but not really - he went around petitioning to change a street sign to "Tupac Blvd". It was funny. However, most people - white people - were turned off by this notion. Without second thought, people automatically said no. It's hard to determine what the reason was for it. Because he was a rapper? Because he was black? Because they simply didn't want to change the street sign? I believe that they didn't want to ruin the reputation of their "hoity toity" neighborhood. They liked having the high class thing going on...and to them they associated "Tupac" with something negative. Really interesting. As for the song "Wake Me Up When September Ends", it deals with two teenagers (who from the looks of it come from a nice home, looked middle class. To them, they had it all. They weren't worried about money or wondering if they would fit in at school, or even college. Their attention - full attention - was on each other. Their happy-go-lucky love life comes to a screeching halt when he enlists in the army. I think this goes to show that nobody has it all. Even if on the outside it may look like they do - they don't. Just because this couple doesn't struggle with money doesn't mean they don't have worries themselves. In this case, in contrast to all the other things I have talked about in this blog, they are worried for his survival through the war. I think it was a good contrast to the other pieces we looked at for this unit because it showed a middle to high class people struggling too. It is important to never judge because everyone has their own levels of hardship they go through on a daily basis.