9. March 2010 by student.

In today’s media we keep hearing more and more about teen pregnancy.  We have the show “16 and pregnant”  talking about this issue.  When people start watching this show and reading these articles most think “why are these girls doing this to themselves? They should just have an abortion”.  People say this because you always hear the horrible statistics on how teen pregnancies lead to girls dropping out of school and not receiving higher education and my not even complete high school.  This then leads to the mother and her child going on welfare.  People also say that these teens’ children are more likely to also have a teen pregnancy, so the cycle never stops.  These are the many reasons why people just want teens to have an abortion.  However, the show “16 and pregnant” shows us that we cannot stereo type the teens that get pregnant and show us there are other options besides abortion.  There are two great examples of this with Catelynn and Farrah.

Catelynn is a high school junior from a small town in Michigan. She is so grateful to have her boyfriend Tyler of three years to be there with her through this pregnancy because they both come from unsteady households.  Catelynn’s mom can be described as short fused and unreliable and Tyler’s dad is always in and out of jail.  To make matter worse Catelynn’s mom and Tyler’s dad are now getting married and Catelynn is pregnant with Tyler’s child.  Catelynn and Tyler decide that they are not ready to have a family and decide to put the child up for adoption.  Believe it or not Catelynn and Tyler’s friends are the only people supportive of their decision.  Catelynn’s mom is not supportive of adoption, and she tells Catelynn that she’s sure to change her mind when the time comes. Tyler’s dad is even less supportive. He can’t understand handing your baby to perfect strangers. So Catelynn and Tyler decide to give the baby for adoption against their parents’ wishes.  Tyler’s mom is the only family member who supports them. She drives them to an adoption agency to explore their options. Once there, the social worker, Dawn, gives them some “parent books” to look through, to see if anyone appeals to them. She says that sometimes the kindest thing one can do is be selfless and give up the baby. They agree to think it all over.   After looking over the “parent books” they find Brandon and Teresa that seem like the perfect family for their child.  When they tell their parents about their decision their parents go mad, put the young teens fight back saying they want better for their child then the life they had and have to live.  Then the time came for the baby to be born and they followed through with give up their baby girl for adoption and giving her a better life.Farrah is a popular cheerleader at her Council Bluffs, Iowa high school. She has big dreams, and juggles cheer with her job and grades.  She unexpectedly gets pregnant and rumors start flying around her school.  She has to deal with keeping the baby’s dad - who has proven unfit to be in the picture - in the dark about her news, and it’s getting harder to do with the gossip that’s flying around her.  Finally, Farrah attempts to squash the rumors by telling the team about her “situation.” They understand, and she hopes the drama will end here. After all, she has enough to deal with without this. She’s making big life decisions as a single “expecting” mom. And though her parents feel adoption is the best choice, Farrah’s not so sure.  The rumors keep flying and Farrah decides to quit cheerleading and decides to finish school out at the local community college.  Her mom, still has mixed feelings about her teenage daughter having a baby is her only consistent source of support, and makes it very clear that she doesn’t want Farrah partying or dating at such a serious time. In a last attempt at teenage-ness, Farrah defies her mom to go on a date with a boy from her work. When he bails on her at the last minute, she decides that her young, carefree days are over.  As her due date approaches, Farrah realizes that even her family might not be there for her in the way she needs. Her mom and sister are squeamish, and in the middle of Farrah’s delivery room tour, they reveal that they might not have it in them to be with her at the birth. Then one night Farrah’s water breaks at an inconvenient moment and her mom is left to coach her through the whole process alone. After 8 hours of labor, Farrah gives birth to Sophia, and her mom even cuts the umbilical cord. Motherhood seems to suit Farrah and even though she goes a little stir-crazy sometimes, she still goes out of her way to give Sophia the best life possible with the help and support of her family.There are so many other examples of how our class, ethnicity, and social standings really impact how these teen pregnancies are each affected.  Although, in the end there are other options then abortion and it’s good to hear and now woman are showing that there other options and they are taking responsibility for their actions.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 2 Comments »

9. March 2010 by student.

I’ve always wondered why movie ratings are so important.  Who decides who can watch a movie and how do they qualify some for a certain movie and no one for another.  So, I decided to look it up on mpaa.org which is the Motion Picture Association of America. “The ratings are decided by a full-time Rating Board located in Los Angeles. There are 10-13 members of the Board who serve for periods of varying length. They work for the Classification and Rating Administration, which is funded by fees charged to producers/distributors for the rating of their films. The MPAA Chairman chooses the Chairman of the Rating Board, thereby insulating the Board from industry or other group pressure. No one in the movie industry has the authority or power to push the Board in any direction or otherwise influence it. There are no special qualifications for Board membership, except that the members must have a shared parenthood experience, must be possessed of an intelligent maturity, and most of all, have the capacity to put themselves in the role of most American parents so they can view a film and apply a rating that most parents would find suitable and helpful in aiding their decisions about their children and what movies they see.”

So what do the ratings really mean?

G- General Audiences (All Ages Admitted)  “Contains nothing in theme, language, nudity, sex, violence or other matters that, in the view of the Rating Board, would offend parents whose younger children view the motion picture. The G rating is not a “certificate of approval,” nor does it signify a “children’s” motion picture.”

PG-Parental Guidance Suggested (Some material may not be suitable for children) “Should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture.”

PG-13- Parents Strongly Cautioned (Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13) “A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category.  The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.”

R- Restricted (Under 17 requires accompanying parent or adult guardian) “An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian.”

NC-17- No one 17 and under admitted “The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children.”

I believe that these ratings are very helpful for myself and parents around the world as well.  Though, most of the time they are not followed completely, I feel that they are a useful guide to teaching others of what is acceptable to watch for certain age groups.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 2 Comments »

2. March 2010 by student.

Republican Sen. Jim Bunning of Kentucky has single-handedly blocked a million Americans from receiving unemployment and COBRA health insurence benifits.  “I believe we should pay for it” the senetor said. He continued on saying “I’m trying to make a point to the people of the United States.”  Sen. Bunning wants to find $10.3 billion in spending cuts to pay for the bill.  When his colleagues on the senate floor questioned Sen. Bunning about his actions and told him they thought his possion was wrong, Sen. Bunning replied “tough sh*t.”                                                                        

How noble of Sen. Bunning to make a stand against government spending on the backs of hard working American familys hurting from the current recession.  Where was his stand against excessive government spending when wastful defence bills were passed.  Sen. Bunning has a job. He has healthcare insurense.  Sen. Bunning obviously also has alot of power.  But what about American families that are strapped and are trying to buy grocieres and pay the rent?  How much power do they have?  Americans want to work but when unemployment is at near 10% it is not always possible to find a job.  Unemloyment benifits are a saftey net for Americans when times are tough.  It’s not good enough to say ‘Hey, I have everything I need if you don’t, well then thats just too bad’.  With power comes resposibility.  When circumstances warrant our elected officials have the resposibility to put aside idiogical grandstanding and do what is right for our countries people. 

When reporters approached Sen. Bunning after he left the senate floor and tried to ask him questions he walk toward the elevator and and shot the middle finger over his head.  Sen. Benning I have a point I want to make with you.  Here’s the middle finger right back at ya!

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

2. March 2010 by student.

Yes, it now has a name, third degree smoking. 

We all know first degree smokers are the ones who actually smoke, kill their lungs, are always coughing, and can barely breath by the time they’re in their 70’s. Also, they can get emphysema,  heart disease, lung disease, and so on.  It can shorten your life by at least 10 years and most of the time even more. And it obviously costs thousands and thousands of dollars.  Even when taxes go up, they’re still willing to pay to get their nicotine fix.

 Secondhand smoke is also known as environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) or passive smoke. It is a mixture of 2 forms of smoke that come from burning tobacco: sidestream smoke (smoke that comes from the end of a lighted cigarette, pipe, or cigar) and mainstream smoke (smoke that is exhaled by a smoker).

When non-smokers are exposed to secondhand smoke it is called involuntary smoking or passive smoking. Non-smokers who breathe in secondhand smoke take in nicotine and other toxic chemicals just like smokers do. The more secondhand smoke you are exposed to, the higher the level of these harmful chemicals in your body.

The risks present to those around smokers are not just limited to second hand smoke (passive smoking) but also a less obvious “third hand” smoke residue.

That’s the term being used to describe the invisible yet toxic brew of gases and particles clinging to smokers’ hair and clothing, not to mention cushions and carpeting that lingers long after second-hand smoke has cleared from a room. The residue includes heavy metals, carcinogens and even radioactive materials that young children can get on their hands and ingest, especially if they’re crawling or playing on the floor.

It’s hard to believe that smoking has come to this.  It has a much larger effect on the people and spaces around you than one would think, rather than just being used to simply calm down and relax or to fix to addiction.  I sincerely hope that smoking will eventually come to an end.  I believe it will allow our society and population to live longer and healthier lives and fulfill our dreams to a more realistic time span of achievement.

Works Cited

American Cancer Society

Lampard, John. Dissasociated.com; notedpad to point zero. 7 January 2009. Web. 1 March 2010

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

1. March 2010 by student.

Recently, a trainer at Sea World in Orlando named Dawn Brancheau was attacked by the killer whale she was about to do an act with. While she began the show, the whale began circling in the tank angrily, and Dawn jumped in the water to begin the trick. Instead of performing the trick, the whale began attacking her. The whale that society viewed as sweet “Shamu” began jumping and landing on the trainer, then proceeded to drag her by the head around the tank, and she drowned. I was seriously shocked when I heard this news. Society believes the Killer Whale at Seaworld named Shamu is a friendly whale that just did some cool tricks with trainers. I remember going to Seaworld and watching a similar show of the show that would have been performed that day, if the accident did not occur. I was even more shocked to find out that, that particular whale had also killed two other trainers! Why had they not put the whale down?  Is a killer whale exactly that: A killer? These are questions that the media are raising, as well as society. This accident has changed our view on how we see Seaworld. This also makes us question how these animals that are kept in captivity are treated. Is keeping them seperate from the wild and making them train for our own amusment really ethical? And could it get someone seriously injured or killed?

I think this accident has caused a serious amount of dysfunction in our society. Who knows, maybe one day they will eliminate Seaworld and theme parks that keep animals captive altogether? Because if you think about it, is it really ethical to keep an animal away from the wild and keep it in a cage? It just doesn’t seem fair.

 If you watch the video of the accident, you would understand why I am so shocked that this happened. To think of all of those children witnessing this, and watching the poor woman getting attacked, it is sickening. It should make society question all theme parks in general. Do we think it was just that particular whale who is violent and dangerous, or is it all whales in general? Was it the way the theme park works the animals to death that made the whale attack, or is a killer whale just a killer?

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-seaworld-orlando-shamu-injury-20100224,0,6350085.story

 Media footage of the attack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Af67qv5Dzg

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

25. February 2010 by student.

As we all know in the United States there is a minimum wage. Right now this is at $7.25 per hour (http://www.dol.gov/whd/flsa/index.htm). This wage is defiantly not enough to support any single independent person completely. If a person works a 50 hour work week they will make $362.50 before taxes. In a year this person will make $18,850 if they worked every single week 50 hours. The average cost of living in the US is about $95 a day (http://www.chacha.com/question/what-is-the-average-cost-of-living-in-america). If you do the math this is about twice what the minimum wage 50 hours per week person can make. Even with the most extreme of rationing and cost saving a single person cannot live on minimum wage alone. So why don’t we have a minimum wage where a person can support themselves? I purpose a minimum living wage. A federal standard that all INDEPENDENT people should make no matter where they work. To acquire this standard a person would have to prove independence some way to the govt. and their employer. This wage should be intended for the 30 something year old who has no other choice than to work at publix and not the kid who is trying to make some extra cash. It seems like a lot of the people on welfare and unemployment need these programs because minimum wage just doesn’t cut it and they need federal help. So why not give people an adequate minimum salary that they can truly live on rather then just hand them money because they are lacking funds.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

23. February 2010 by student.

Most of the individuals that qualify for unemployment are usually on the poorer side of the economy.  Yet, at the same time, with the recent recession, many are not.   One for example, is my father.  My father was in the Coast Guard for 28 ½ years and retired as an E9, also known as Master Chief Yeoman, the highest ranking as a Yeoman in the Coast Guard.  When he retired, almost 2 years ago now, he found a job right away working for a Cruise Line.  Then one Monday morning, they told him to get a box, pack up, and leave.  Since then, he has been actively seeking for work for over a year, with no solutions.   Since then, our family income has significantly gone down, even though he is still receiving a retirement pension.  Equally, since he is receiving a retirement pension, it is unfortunately too much to qualify for unemployment.  But is that fair?

                    According to Floridajobs.org regarding unemployment, it states, “Any individual who is currently unemployed or partially unemployed can file a claim.  Two determinations must be made on a claim to determine eligibility.  The first determination will advise the individual if you have had sufficient work and earnings in Florida to establish a monetarily eligible claim.  A monetarily eligible claim does not necessarily mean that you are eligible to receive benefits.  The second determination pertains to the separation from the last or possibly next to the last employer.  The reason for separation from the last employer, possibly the next to the last employer and other eligibility requirements must be examined to determine if you are eligible to receive benefits. This second determination will not be issued until the claim is filed and the claimant has actually certified for weeks of unemployment.”  Claims are only the beginning to applying to receive unemployment.

                    Also according to Floridajobs.org, they explain the minimum requirements to qualify for unemployment. “To establish a monetarily eligible unemployment compensation claim, a person must have worked and earned wages during the first four quarters of the previous five completed quarters prior to filing a claim.  This period of time is called the “base period.”   The base period changes every three months at the beginning of each new quarter starting in January, April, July and October. To qualify monetarily, a person must:

·        Have been paid wages in two or more calendar quarters in the base period;

·        Have total base period wages of at least 1-1/2 times the wages in the quarter having the highest earnings;

·        Have at least $3,400 total wages in the base period. “

These are only the minimum requirements though.  There are many other qualifications and requirements that are involved.  Overall, my point is, is this fair?  Even though my father is receiving a pension and it is something to live off of while unemployed, it essentially is not enough to maintain the lifestyle we lived while he was employed.  Should we have to give up what we had just to make ends meet because of some qualifications on paper? 

Works Cited

State of Florida Agency for Workforce Innovation. State of Florida, Agency for Workforce Innovation. 2010. Web. 22 February 2010

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

23. February 2010 by student.

                 Currently, a big topic at many US Universities and Colleges is to have the drinking age lowered to 18.  The schools believe that by outlawing drinking from students that are under 18 is causing more problems.  They also believe that if the drinking age was changed to 18 that they would be able to regulate the use of alcohol, so students would not become overly intoxicated.  The Universities also believe that this would also cut down on the number of college campus alcohol related deaths and injuries.  Also the campus officials would also be able to better monitor alcohol use. According to a Times Magazine article titled: Teenage Drinking, “in studies through the 1990s by the Harvard School of Public Health, the percentage of college students who reported binge drinking within the previous two weeks remained steady at 44%. (Binging was defined as five drinks in a row for boys and four for girls.)”.  Also in the article that state how in 1997 MIT chose to avoid a lawsuit by paying out 6 million dollars to the parents of a freshman who drank himself to death at a fraternity initiation.  After seeing this and many other cases like this college administrations rather bow down and lower the drinking age then having to worry about these accidents, deaths, and lawsuits.  They also see it as they can use the money they save on law suits and things and use it towards educating students on how to drink safely. 

                What about do parents think about lowering the drinking age to 18?  Well surprisingly, many parents agree with lowering the drinking age.  They see that ever since the drinking age has been raised to 21 that drinking has led to the rise in teen death, injuries, school problems, teen pregnancy, sexual assault on teen girls, juvenile crime, rebelling against the government and parents  and drinking too much which is the cause of adult drinking problems.   It is also very often that parents will supply their teenagers with alcohol so that they are doing it and being monitored when doing so.  Most parents these days that have children from the ages 15 to 20 see that lowering the drinking age will help stop these issues because they know how things were back in college and how the drinking age was raised.  Then you have the younger parents that were not allowed to drink till 21 and you see two different views.  You see the parents that saw the horrible effect alcohol on their friends and believe that if the drinking age was lower they wouldn’t have drank as much because it was accessible to them.  Then you have the one’s that saw these horrible things and think that the rules should be enforced more and that drinking at such young age leads to brain damage and alcoholism in young adults.  So as you can see depending on when the student’s parent grew up shows different views on the drinking age.

                The students however have a very different take on the subject.  Students believe if they are allowed to vote at the age of 18 and have a say in our world why can’t they drink?  Along with this responsibility to vote comes the responsibility of jury duty.  Also young man question if they are forced to join the selective service, for possible drafting for the war, again why can’t I drink?  So at the age of 18 you trust students to take on major responsibilities such as voting, jury duty, and going to war, which are all adult responsibilities then you tell them you have to wait 3 years to drink.  How does that make any sense, I can do anything and start my life without even going to college but I cannot drink till 21? Students also agree that if the drinking age was lowered they most likely wouldn’t drink as much as they do.  Their reasoning is that if it is accessible I won’t have to binge on it because I do not know when I will get the chance to again.  You also have in college you fraternities and sororities and other groups on campus that are made up of a wide range of ages.  This leads to younger students being in situations with drinking and are being pressured to drink and consume alcohol. 

                So with these three different views and the facts presented you can see how lowering the drinking age is best for everyone.  There will always be those horrible tragedies but they will happen whether or not the drinking age is 18 or 21.  But I believe that in the end lowering the drinking age will lower  death rates of college students, which will benefit the Universities enrollment, parents still having their children, and students going on and doing great things in the future. 

Posted in Mr. Andoscia, Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

22. February 2010 by student.

When you wake up, you might turn on your computer before class to see a news update on Google, Yahoo, Bing, whatever your home page is set to.  You might grab a newspaper, or a coffee at Einstein Bros. while watching one of the many morning shows.  Later in the day you might pick up the latest sports magazine, or Cosmo.  Then you come home and “pre-game” for your favorite show, getting food ready, making sure your comfortable, and finishing all other work before relaxing in front of the television.  Then maybe you will watch a late night show, (whichever one your loyal to), right before you go to bed.  Every day we have some sort of schedule whether we set it or it just happens, and for most people the vast majority of this schedule includes interaction with some form of the media, whether it be newspaper or reality show.  We just don’t realize how much the media affects all of us.  According to a study made by California State University students, over 99% of households in the United States own a television.  The average American will watch over 4 hours of television a day, adding up to an astonishing 9 years of watching television during a 65-year life  (Television).  Now, not everyone watches that much television, and some of you may watch twice as much, but this is an astonishing statistic that many of us have contributed to.  In regards to magazines, according to the Media Information Center, the average magazine reader spends 45 minutes reading one issue.  85% of U.S. adults read magazines regularly, and 87% of those adults purchase a subscription  (Media Info Center).  From Cosmo to Late night with Jimmy Fallon, the media affects us more then we know.  People may wear certain clothes because of what fashion is currently being shown on the latest episode of The Hills.  Friends are torn apart by political news stations like Fox.  Girls are glued to magazines like Cosmopolitan and Vogue, guys to sports and car magazines.  People act like the actors and actresses they see on television and movies because they think it’s cool.  After great comedies like the Hangover come out, people repeat the jokes so much that it makes you wish the movie never even came out.  The media affects us in such a profound way that I can’t even begin to describe it with simple statistics and opinions.  I am not saying I don’t pre-game for my favorite shows and pick up a sports/car magazine every once in a while, but I don’t let the media change me, (at least not to much).  Whether the media’s effect is good or bad, that’s a matter of opinion.

http://www.mediainfocenter.org/magazine/magazinecategories.asp

http://www.csun.edu/science/health/docs/tv&health.html

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »

22. February 2010 by student.

“Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world. “

-Nelson Mandela

               When we are young, we learn the most about life and who or what is important. Why is gender such an important idea and term in our society?  Why must we conform to these social institutions telling us who were supposed to be and who were not allowed to be?  When walking through toy stores, the toys are organized in a way to reinforce the ideas of femininity, masculinity, or other.  Walk down one aisle, pink overkill.  The next aisle is loaded with plastic muscles, guns, and trucks.  The next aisle is usually shades of yellow for those parents who don’t know the sex of their upcoming child or for newborns and babies, when these ideas are not as important to the parents because the children cannot yet tell which is right or wrong.  But is there a right or wrong?

               Why do only girls get to play with bratz dolls, shopping carts, and easy bake ovens?  The most dominant subjects for female gendered toys or games are beauty and popularity. As young girls and women, we are taught the things that are socially acceptable and “normal” for girls and women to achieve or portray regarding how we are supposed to look or act.  This learning period must also include socialization, which is a lifelong process of learning social skills and standards and acquiring status in society. 

               The most dominant subject for male gendered toys or games that I noticed is sports.  When walking through a toy store, one very noticeable section is trading cards.  Yet, almost every single card has a male pictured on it. Why is that?  Can only men play sports? Obviously not, there are many professional women players and teams out there, but why aren’t they on trading cards? This situation could also be perceived as dominance and subordination.  In this case, the dominant group (males), have defined that the most acceptable roles in sports are only acceptable for males to take part in and that females are the subordinate group because they are “worse” at sports. 

               I believe that toys & games are the main ingredient in our children’s newly constructed lives and play a major part in their futures.  A major part of all of this is marketing as the biggest contributor. It is important to teach our children the values and morals they need to succeed in life, and let them know that life does not revolve around gender alone.  We must learn who we truly are on our own and not by the colors or pictures on a box.

Posted in Introduction to Sociology | 1 Comment »