Week # 15 - Media and Body Image

Although not audibly, the media speaks to us. The media whispers in our ears as we pass by billboards. It says “not good enough. Not smart enough. Not tall enough. Not skinny enough. Not light enough.  Not manly enough. Not unique enough. You are not enough.”

We don’t realize that the media is poisoning our minds with thoughts of inadequacy. Young girls look in the mirror and think, I would be pretty if_______. You fill in the blank. I know I did as a young girl. I let the media tell me that because my body type was bad because it was different.  It took me years to realize that the media was lying to me. But finally one day at a particularly difficult softball practice I realized that my body had purpose. My body was created to be strong, and it was.  Realizing that was the turning point for me. I switched from hating myself, to seeing that I had worth because I was created that way.

The media is so influential. Not only does the media influence the mind of young girls, but it affects boys as well. The media tell boys that the only way to be a man is to me tough and strong. Big boys don’t cry. But with so much power the media could have such a powerful positive influence. However, the media chooses to project unrealistic expectations of people. The Target ad shown in class for instance, shows biologically impossible standards of women. The woman in the photo had such a wide “thigh-gap” due to photo-shop that she literally was missing half of her vagina. What that does is set a standard that cannot be met by anyone, including the models that are supposed to portray that body image.

Bottom line? We need to diversify the media. More races and ethnicities, varying sizes, and heights. More than anything, we need to stop photo-shopping models to have bodies that are literally biologically impossible. We need change, and we need it now.

Week #14 - Kami: The HIV Positive Muppet

     Kami is a staple character on the Nigerian and South African versions of Sesame Street. Sweet little Kami is supposed to represent a young girl you is HIV positive. Kami is a good character for these versions of Sesame Street because HIV and AIDS is a huge problem in Africa. Millions of men. women, and children have been infected by HIV or AIDS. The research has shown that Kami has been a very positive influence on the children in South Africa and Nigeria. However, this week's question is "Would a character like Kami be helpful/appropriate for the US version of Sesame Street?"
     My answer? Helpful, yes. Appropriate/Necessary, no. Yes children need to understand how HIV and AIDS are transmitted and how they cannot be spread through hugs or sneezes. It is also important that we let go of the stigma that people with HIV or AIDS are either gay or some kind of drug-addicted convict.
      In the 80's and 90's Ryan White received a blood transfusion that was HIV positive. Ryan, only a young boy at the time, became infected with the disease. He was tormented by not only his peers, but adults as well. Rumors circulated that Ryan was gay. The school administration didn't know how to handle Ryan either. He was separated from the other children as if he would infect them by his presence alone. If we taught children about HIV and AIDS people would be able to let go of the untrue stereotypes that still plague the people who suffer from these diseases.
     However, because HIV and AIDS are not as prevalent in America as they are in countries such as South Africa and Nigeria it is not necessary to have Kami on our Sesame Street. Although I do believe that it is necessary to educate children on HIV and AIDS, I do not believe it is necessary to do so at such a young age. Like I previously stated, this is because HIV and AIDS are not as big of a problem in the US as they are in other areas of the world.

Week #13 - Academics vs. Education

Still feeling cynical, by the way. Be warned. Here lie dragons.
     "Tell me and I forget, teach me and I remember, involve me and I learn."- Benjamin Franklin. From this quote the question was asked "How can your education at USI be based on involvement?" Well for starters, we could get more professors that actually care about their students. The ratio, in my opinion, of caring to shit professors is about 50/50. Half of my professors are really great and teach in a way that I understand and connect to. However, the other half could care less about their students and instead they drone on and on in their lectures not even looking us in the eyes. (You know who you are!!!)
     If teachers were more involved, their students would be more involved. For example, my psychology professor was teaching us a lesson about neurons. And since people don't really regularly see or talk about neurons, they can be hard to understand. So to get us to understand how neurons worked, the professor go the whole class to stand up with our arms in a certain position and we had to pass a ball around like a neuron would transmit a signal. She involved us, and we learned! 
    As I preciously said, a lot of our classes are basically a serious of lectures where the professor drones on and on about a subject you could not care less about. Instead if classes involved more discussion and hands on learning people would be able to learn better. For example, in my English 201 class we spend a lot of time discussing current issues. Even if you knew nothing about an issue before the class, after the discussion you have learned both sides on an issue. Getting students talking in a class is key. Most people need to think out loud and discuss in order to cement knowledge into their brains. I know that discussing something after I have learned it makes me understand the concept much better! 
     So bottom line? You want us to be involved? Involve us.

Week # 12 - The Trolley Problem

  Warning! I'm feeling cynical.  
     A trolley is racing down the tracks, as it reaches the crest of the hill the driver sees that there are five people on the track. The driver slams on the brakes, but the brakes do not work. There is an alternate track coming up that the driver could  take to avoid the five people, but when the driver looks at the alternate track he sees that there is a person on that track as well. No one can here him yell and he can't stop. Which track should he take?
     For me, the answer to this question is quite simple. There is no good option, but there is a better option. Obviously the better option is to take one life instead of five. The discussion should really end there, but as it goes with these aimless scenarios it does not. Some people say "well if you continue to go straight you accidentally kill five people, but if you take the alternate track, then you are intentionally killing one person." That logic however is weak at best. These what ifs literally serve no purpose but to start fruitless arguments among the foolish.
     If you actually use logic to solve this (non-)problem you will realize that five lives > one life. Simple math. which number is bigger, 1 or 5? Obviously five. End of story.
     Or not. The next scenario starts off in a similar fashion, however this time there is no alternate track but rather two friends on a bridge above watching the scene happen. One friend is described to be "fat" (which by the way is weightism, and is neither cool or okay to use the "fat" person in this scenario as the disposable person. Not cool bro.) while the other person is not described at all. The non-fat friend sees that the trolley driver is going to kill all five of these people because he cannot stop. So in an effort to save the five people the non-fat person pushes the "fat" person off of the bridge and in front of the trolley; successfully stopping the trolley, saving the five people down the track, and killing the "fat" person. So the question now is "Is it okay to sacrifice one life to save five?" The answer is hell no. If you wanted to throw a body off of that bridge to save those people you can throw your own damn body off of the bridge. Throwing your friend off of a bridge is bad. (Remember this little life lesson kids!) In this scenario the "fat" person is murdered because he neither willingly gave his life nor was his life accidentally taken.
     I am tired of these hypotheticals. They are bullshit. Sorry for my language, I told you I was feeling cynical. Also, I'm a big kid now so I get to use big kid language every now and again.

Week #11 - Women in Combat

            Personally, the integration of women into the military does not interest or concern me so I do not have a vast knowledge of the subject. However, I do believe that women should be able to fight in combat roles along side of men. A few reasons I believe that are because women bring a different perspective to the front lines; the way war is fought now, anywhere can be the front lines: and most importantly because men and women are completely equal and should be treated as such. On how women should be integrated, I think it is less complicated than we think.

            For starters, women and men would need separate tests to be able to go into combat because the male and female bodies are different and have unique capabilities and limitations. That does not mean that the test to go to combat would be any less challenging, just that it would be different for men and women. As for getting women to want to be in combat roles that seems like the more complicated part. But combat-pay is always a good incentive. Also, for when men and women are fighting on enemy land together they will need separate sleeping and washing facilities, although washing facilities could be dealt with by a rigid schedule. Chances are, these changes would require little to no new building.

            If you really look at this problem you will see that it’s basically not a problem at all! Men just need to let go of the notion that women are fragile and need to be saved, and begin to look at women as strong independent human beings. In conclusion, this issue really does not interest or concern me so my opinions on this issue may not be as well thought out as others. However, the issue of women being in combat is a non-issue. They will be integrated by 2016, and the military needs to find way to integrate whether they like it or not.

Week #10 - Jen Chapin and Activism

            I thought that Jen Chapin’s performance was lackluster. First and foremost, I found her hard to relate to. She was flowery and new agey, and I found that I could not connect to that. Also, her speech seemed poorly organized. I saw that Jen was using notes, but it felt as if she didn’t have a precise beginning, middle, and end. Without good structure, Jen was unable to get a point across. All food is bad, unless it is organic? Was that the point? I was unsure, especially because we were given fast-food pizza to eat during the presentation.

            As for Jen’s music it was rather ordinary. Jen’s voice was the more enjoyable half of her performance. The songs were very wordy and pointed, which I’m sure was her purpose, however they turned me off from her style.

            Although I did not particularly like Jen very much, I do believe I could be an activist. As I’ve said on previous blog posts, I feel morally and spiritually obligated to be an activist. I feel a calling to be the kind of person who advocates for others, however I do not know what that means in my life now or in the future. One thing that I hope I will be able to do in the future is spend some time each summer to work on mission teams to various countries. As I plan to be a high school English teacher, I know those summers off are valuable and I think they can be best spent serving God and others. And like Jen, not everyone will like what I say, or how I say it. And that’s okay, because the point is that someone is out there saying it!

            In conclusion, I did not connect very well with the speaker Jen Chapin. Jen did not do spectacularly on either her speaking or her music, but her cause is a noble one. The one thing that I connect with Jen on is a calling to be an activist in some way. One day, in whatever way it may be, I want to be putting my life last, and putting God’s causes before me.  

Week #8 - Good Samaritan

            Advocacy has been a theme in our world for longer than we realize. The classic Bible story of “The Good Samaritan” is essentially a story about advocacy. In this story a person goes far out of their way, even going against their religious mandates in order to help someone in need. This story is often used as a reminder to do good things for others. But when real-life emergencies arise, do people actually stand up and help?

            In class we discussed a situation that occurred in California where the Good Samaritan principles were put to test. An old woman has a heart attack at a nursing home where they have a no CPR policy. The staff calls 911 so first-responders can come help, however they refuse to help the woman themselves. The woman who answers the 911 call, begs the staff members to help the woman. The staff continues to refuse. The 911 responder becomes frantic, she begs the staff members to pull someone off of the street to help. The woman dies.

            Was it wrong to refuse CPR? I believe that the staff were following rules and therefore were not wrong in refusing to preform CPR. However, if I was in that position, I would not be able to stand there and let the woman die. I would feel morally obligated to do everything in my power to save her. (But that’s just who I am, I can’t be a bystander. I have to be an advocate.)

            So the new problem is the policy. Why would a nursing home/senior living facility have a no CPR policy? (Insurance issues?) Is it ethical to be in a medical facility and not provide simple medical services? In my opinion, no. All the nurses and CAN’s in the facility should be trained in CPR, so why would the nursing home have a policy against it? It is understandable for individuals to have DNR orders, but for an entire facility to refuse to resuscitate seems illogical.

            In conclusion, this situation is just one example where no Good Samaritan stands up. Maybe it is our human nature, or maybe it is our culture; but something keeps us from taking action. Whatever it is, we need to rise above it and become activists and advocates when the situation calls for it.

Week #6 - Advocacy

            In life it is important to advocate for those who are unable to advocate for themselves. As a society, we praise those who go out of their way to come to the aid of others. The news channels are full of stories about ordinary people rescuing cats and saving drowning children. We love the warm feeling we get inside when people do good things. However fuzzy feelings aside, when push comes to shove (sometimes literally) people are more likely to do absolutely NOTHING. This is called the Bystander Effect.

            Malala and her father are some of the few people to overcome the bystander effect and take action in a time of need. For Malala it was standing up to the Taliban’s demented regime, but for common Americans what do we have to come against? One thing is neglect/abuse.

             In a scenario brought forth in class we discussed an altercation between a young man and woman in the school parking lot. The man was yelling at the woman and becoming physical with her. Although approximately eighty people walked past this disturbing scene only one person stopped. This one person did not say anything, but only gave the man a stern look, causing him to walk away angrily. The girl was left visibly shaken up. Although an older woman stopped and helped, 80 people did nothing.

            What causes our cowardly non-actions? Some would say self-preservation. If you intervene in the situation the man is likely to yell at you or even assault you. Others would say that it is not their business to intervene in someone else’s life. However are we not all connected? Are we not all human? Do we not have some sense of camaraderie with our fellow man? It is our responsibility to be an activist. It is our responsibility to be advocates. Would you not want someone to advocate for you if you could not? Of course you would!

Journal # 5 - Graduation rates at USI in light of "I Am Malala"

As we learned in class, the USI graduation rate for four and six years is not as high as it should be. There are multiple reasons for the graduation rate to be so low at USI. The Graduation rates for both four and six years are less than 40% each. The four-year graduation rate is actually less than 25%. These numbers are too small.

            The graduation rates for USI are very low for multiple reasons. One reason is that many students transfer away from USI after starting school here. Another reason is that USI has low standards of admission, and therefore the student body isn’t as motivated as many other universities. However, on a larger scale graduation rates are low at USI because of the American view on education. In today’s society, many students have lost the zeal for education. This differs greatly from other nations.

            For example, as we’ve read in our I Am Malala books the Children of Pakistan are motivated to get an education. Malala herself was so motivated to get an education that she was willing to go against the Taliban’s heinous regime, and even got shot for going to school. This extreme example shows that the American education system is doing something wrong.

            Education is one of the main themes in I Am Malala. Through Malala’s story we see the importance of education. Education is unlike any other thing in the world. With an education people can move up social classes and free themselves from oppression. An education can change a person’s life in a way that no other thing can.

            If American’s valued education the way many other culture’s do, the graduation rates of USI and all other universities would be much higher. Education is so easy to come by in America, however in many other countries an education can be almost impossible to attain. Maybe if was more difficult to get into college, we would value college more and in turn, work harder in school.

            In conclusion, the USI graduation rates are very low. One reason that the graduation rates are so low at USI is because the students do not value education, as they should. In I Am Malala we see that other cultures value education so highly that they would risk their lives to become educated.  If American’s valued education like people did in other countries such as Pakistan, the graduation rates could be much higher.