My to questions is how is the word “home” defined? What is condsidered a home? This text is saying that people often live in their comfort zone. Also Kothan spoke on the fact that homes homes or placeness is being change due to technology and small and local businesses.
The Great American Bubble Machine is about Goldmans Sachs a large investment bank that is causing America to be financially unstable. The way this is claim to happen is because they had a high chair in politics. Not only that in this text it was said that it had a lot to do with manipulation. Since they were o high in politics it was easy to out smart everyone. What their manipulation has caused was high gas prices, future taxes to pay off bailouts, and rising consumer credit rates. At first when I read the title of this text I had no clue what it would be about, but now since I have read it I find the title creative. The title refers to politics and America going onto a recession. The reason is called the Great American Bubble Machine is because we are in a bubble and control by the widely known bank. When you refer to bubble it is consider a bad thing! For example the Great depression is considered a bubble for America. What I found interesting about this text is that it said all the money we are loosing is investing in the Goldmans bank!
The text “See Baby Discriminate” is a study that shows that people form an opinion at a young age. By doing that at the children’s research lab at the University of Texas they were trying to see if kids notices race. This subject was very sensitive or shall I say personal but in order to prove their study their need the help from parents. Some parents talk about race to their children when they are older, most do not talk about it at a young age. According to the text the reason why parents do not talk about race straight forward with their kids because they do not know exactly how to explain race. As I was reading this I understood what the parents were coming from, but at the same time I did not agree with ignoring the fact there is a difference between our skin colors. Not that it matter but after reading this kid already form their own opinion and have questions. My point is it will be a good idea to talk to your kids so they would not form the wrong or a negative opinion. A common phrase that parents use to explain race to their kids is “We’re all equal.” Although there is not anything wrong with that but go into details explain how we’re equal. The way parents can do that is bring religion into the conversation as evidence or their cultural background. Even though “we’re all equal” is a true statement in the parent opinion they should still explain it so the children can truly believe it for their selves. For example in the text was a group of kids at school and during recess their attitude towards race was revealed.Although they play together at recess if they had to chose a team they would be on the team with their own kind! The reasoning of the kid doing that is they feel as if they are smarter and nicer than the other team. How did the kids come up with that conclusion? The answer is due to their skin color. So as you can see even if the parents choose not to discuss race kids form an opinion of there own. During the first experiment he typical visit Caucasian families homes. In order to get the experiment started they ask kids safe questions about race then ask them to watch a video involving other races to change their opinion of blacks. They way they did that was they asked them the same questions. Although they showed videos of a way of discussing the issue of racism many parents did not want to actually discuss that subject with their kids. In the text Po Bronson states that the parents wanted their kid to grow up colored blind. The real question is when do kids notice the differences of skin color? As I was reading I said to myself maybe they notice it as babies, because although I was a kid once I never would of guess kids notices the differences of each other complexion. In this text I find out that they do!
Women and the Rise of Raunch is about the way present themselves today. I like the way Ariel Levy wrote from her point of views and experiences. First she stated that when she turn on the television how women were degrading themselves then she turn the channel and it was not any better. The only difference was it was babies of course babies is not showing their stomach or “boobs” but the fact their clothing were so tight is not any better. She’s goes to talk about movies and magazines.This one movie in particular was charlie angels! What the movie was so pose to symbolize the strength and power of women. This movie made $125 million in theaters! That is good right? No, it’s not that movie was a joke it was not so popular because it was a positive reflection of women strength as a whole instead it was popular because the actresses was half naked. The way the actress were dressed took away from the movie but yet not for the producers because they made a lot of money. We are living in a society were it is okay to be raunchy in fact some women find it rewarding. By being raunchy you receive a lot of attention, whether it’s from work, men, or even women.
In Catherine Newman’s essay “I Do Not – Why I Won’t Marry,” she addresses the reasons why she has chosen not to get married. Through a discussion of her own partnership, she explains her decision and how it has affected her life. She concludes that marriage is an institution that objectifies women and allows men to possess them. Judith Warner, a woman with similar experiences, discusses how motherhood also highlights the distinct traditional gender roles of men and women in her essay “This Mess.” Warner compares her experiences as a mother in France and the United States and finds that mothers in the United States are expected to play a larger role than men in their children’s lives and therefore, struggle more with the balance between maintaining their own personal lives and the well-being of their children. This struggle reflects the type of distinct gender roles Newman also concerns herself with. Both Newman and Warner use their personal stories to explore the way these two institutions create the societal differences between men and women. The two essays “I Do Not- Why I Won’t Marry” and “This Mess” each use a strong “I” voice in order to examine how marriage and parenthood respectively place undue pressure on women. They also used other people experiences as well because Judith Warner was interviewed one-hundred and fifty woman to see their point of view and the roles that are being played and Newman used others experiences because she do not know how it feels to be married considering she’s never been married before. So in order to bash marriages she had to analyze those who are married. So that’s how Newman was able to come to the conclusion that she do not want to be married due to the role women are obligated to play.
In Catherine Newman’s essay ” I Do Not- Why I Wont Marry” she explains how marriage makes women an object. When a women and man get married the man is taking ownership of the women. She changed her name to his and is initially signing her life to be committed to him. The man is the one usually ask for the women’s hand in marriage, he is the one in charge. Marriage has become a societal requirement it seems. There is a pressure from friends and family and society in general to find someone and get married. Once a man and women do marry the man is seen as the head of the household, money maker, while the women stays home and cleans and takes care of the kids. Warner basically states the same thing that men play the role where they job i to bring the bacon to the table whereas mothers are expected to stay at home and even the ones who are working plays a bigger role in the child’s life. In both text each author where both able to compare and contrast different roles. Warner compared women roles in France whereas Newman compared the roles woman play that’s not married.
A hierarchy forms where the mans status gets raised above the women’s, which is not healthy for any relationship. In Newman’s essay she says the best life partner is a person who doesn’t crave possession, meaning you want someone who wants to be with you and doesn’t need to get married and have a ring to do it. Not being married allows for space, room to move toward each other and not be bounded by the expectations society has placed on women in marriage. Warner express to the readers that our role as being a stay at home mom or making our children the main focus in our lives is being taken for granted. As Warner stated “people first and women second.” That quote says a lot about how we are being viewed. Women in general even though society has given us the role of being a wife and motherhood does not mean they have given us these roles does not mean we have to play them because dignity is all a person have , and both authors are expressing that by playing these roles we are moving backwards and not forward.
Judith Warner often compared gender roles in today’s society in a household. She compared women roles in France and America. She generally referred back to herself a lot in the text. She also took the reader through her thinking process of why she interviewed certain mothers according to their class level. The purpose of her interviewing the women is to get learn their different experience from motherhood in America whether they was working moms or stay at home moms.
Why is this argument that choosing each other everyday is a reason not to get married true? I think this explains a reason not to get married because in a marriage there’s no longer proof that your husband is in love with you. Loving a person and being in love with a person is a big difference. In a marriage there are probably less romance because you do not have to work for each other’s relationship because your relationship is guaranteed. In fact there are more work required in a marriage , and when there are hard work involved, stress is bound to ac cur. Whereas if you are just partners, the relationship is not guaranteed so you have to work for each other love and it symbolize that they are in love with each other. Not to mention their are less work involved so therefore if you are not married you are most likely to have a happier relationship.
This text shows the trouble immigrants have to go through in order to come to America. The question that’s being asked within the text while I was reading the text is immigrants being brought to America by luck? Because that is how I have always looked a immigrants that have made it into America that they are lucky! Yes, it has a lot to do with luck but also hard work. In order to come here they have to study very hard in order to pass the test. Not only that when they come into America they have to work twice as hard as any one else and receive half of the money that we do. But immigrants still will consider themselves lucky because it’s more than what they was making in their country not to mention they do not have to pay taxes. Another question I wondered as I was reading this text was is it easier for immigrants to come to America now than it was a long time ago? I think it is easier now for the simple fact that we Americans are LAZY, and we have became too comfortable. Whereas immigrants have never get comfortable they are always hungry of bettering their families and their countries.
The text that I have read by Catherine Newman “I Do. Not: Why I Won’t Marry” has a lot of irony in it, and the title itself is confusing. Is they married? On the other hand, are they not married? Is what I immediately asked myself when I read the title! As I read, the book I had concluded that the title reveal the woman character in the book because she is confused herself. What makes her confused is that she is bisexual and she really does not know if she wants to be married or not! She said in the text that she wish her partner Michael would demand that she marry him.” So deep down inside she want do want marriage. As you look read the beginning of the article you realize that she love weddings, and weddings bring romance between her and her partner. As she is describing her dress and Michael’s blazers tell me that, she really wants a wedding. As if it is a fairytale then she explains that the fairytale is ruined and brings her back to reality asking, “Why are you guys not married?” The reason why this is irony is because as I am reading the beginning of the article I think to myself her fairytale is ruined because of that awkward moment but towards the end shows that the moment was not awkward at all. Come to find out she do have a ring to show off. Although, the ring is not a symbol of marriage it is a symbol of love and the guest at the wedding do not have to know otherwise. So that do explains the title because when she received the ring there were a ceremony and she do express her love for her boring husband BUT it was not a wedding ceremony and she explains throughout the article why she do not want to marry. She mentions that a benefit of not being married is being able to leave when you want. A married couple can too but a couple who is not married is less drama. Not to mention a married couple feels more obligated to try to make their relationship work because they took vows. My question is, is that a definite reason not to get married? No, I do not think so because like in she said they still have a kid together. I think the reason she do not want to get married is because she would feel as if she’s trapped in a lie.
The text “People Like Us” by David Brooks analyze the word diversity. We as a whole have not changed as much as we think we have! The idea of diversity and equality is apart of the American dream but it is not what we claim it to be. Are we really diverse? No, we are still segregated in a way. The ways we still considered segregate is according to our neighborhoods and social groups. “It’s appalling that people should be content to cut themselves off from everyone unlike themselves.”
jaylanelson 