Ethnicity and Race

From the readings, video, and websites that we researched this week, one thing that stood out to me was how much easier it is for people from any country to discriminate against others based on how they look than for any other reason. In Rwanda, when expatriots from other countries were being evacuated, more than one person commented in the video that all white people were removed, almost without questions, while all black people were left to fend for themselves. During World War II, when Japanese-Americans were rounded up and herded into concentration camps, German-Americans and Italian-Americans were left alone. Black people living in the U.S. have never been able to assimilate into culture the same way that white immigrants have been able to. These differences all seem based on how people look rather than other defining characteristics. Is this just because we are so visually-oriented or maybe just because our first judgements are usually from what we see? I know that discrimination is based on other factors as well, such as if someone has an accent, what cultural clothing someone wears, etc. but these things can be changed and don't seem to matter as much.

As a white person living in America, I had never experienced any type of racial discrimination, but when my husband and I lived in Japan for four years, I was able to see a little of what this could be like. The Americans living in Okinawa are sometimes portrayed badly to the Okinawan public, but not quite to the same extent that black Americans are portrayed in the media in America. I found that this made me and other Americans that I knew in Okinawa want to get past these judgements and try to be the opposite of what was thought of us. We went above and beyond to try to appear polite, quiet, not greedy, etc. but we were only in the country for a short period of time. I think that this forced attitude on our parts might have grown old after awhile, and we might have begun to resent it, but this is hard to say. After all, we were guests in their country, so we didn't expect the Okinawans to treat us as though we were not different at all. If we were in our own country, experiencing these same discriminatory stereotypes, it would have been a very different situation. Also, it was very frustrating to be out in public and see other Americans acting the way that "typical Americans" act, thus furthering the stereotypes to our Okinawan hosts.

Social Construction of Gender

In the text thus far, what surprised me was the different contexts of gender in other societies. I was interested to learn about gender roles in other cultures, and some of the less-defined divisions between genders in some cultures. If people from these cultures were to view our culture as we have studied theirs, they would probably be surprised to learn how we see each sex. I think that most people are aware of some gender differences between more well-known cultures, such as the stereotype that Latino men objectify women or the supposition that Asian women are quiet and submissive. The differences in gender that were mentioned in the text, however, are much different, in that the dominant sex is not always male. Like it was mentioned in the text, this raised questions to me about theories that use biological reasoning for differences in gender. However, it seemed that all societies had women doing at least 50% of the childcare, which does make sense biologically. I think that biological reasoning has some backing, but it can't explain all the differences in gender in our society or other societies.

Global Inequality

After reading the chapter in the text on Global Inequality, one thing that struck me as interesting was the very last section in the chapter about the possible consequences of increased globalization. One prediction was that our country might not remain a global superpower like it is now and has been in the past. This is interesting because I don't think that this is something that we, as Americans, consider. The current economic state has been blamed on many different things, but I don't think that globalization has even been considered by most people as a reason for possible economic decline. I believe that this reflects the typical American self-centered viewpoint. As the "greatest country in the world" we expect the U.S. to always be at the top, economically and diplomatically. The possibility that globalization could change this and even the playing field, making American wages decrease or causing other changes, is a very sobering thought. I think that I am like most Americans in thinking that we are currently in an economic low but that it will of course improve, hopefully sooner rather than later. This may be the case right now, but in the future, our economy might not continue to always improve, and we may have to rethink our relationship with other countries.

Social Class in the US today

Before reading the chapter in the text and spending some time on the People Like Us website, I probably would have said that social class in the US today affects some parts of our lives but that it doesn't have nearly the same effect as in other parts of the world or in other time periods. After reading and exploring the website, though, I would have to say that I was mistaken. I don't think that I realized before how much emphasis is placed on social class or how much everyone, including myself, tries to fit into their perceived social class. If I ever contemplated the reasons for why I chose certain consumer goods, I would have attributed it to trying to live a healthy lifestyle, but this, in and of itself, is a part of the middle-class expectation. Everyone wants to look healthy and seem focused on their health, because it is considered ignorant to eat unhealthy foods and avoid exercise. My husband and I had some family coming to visit a few weeks ago, so my grocery shopping was different than it normally is, because I was trying to make sure that our visitors would have foods that they were used to eating. At the grocery store, I found that I was embarrassed by the items that were in my cart that I usually avoid, such as white bread, 2% milk (as opposed to the skim milk that I always buy), and potato chips. At the time, I didn't stop to think about why I was embarrassed, but now I think that it had more to do with my paranoia that people would look in my cart and think that I was in a different class than the one that I perceive myself to be in. This is one demonstration that advertising and consumerism in America are even involved in social class divisions.

Changing Social Connections?

I have become aware, even before reading the text that addresses this issue, that our society is in the middle of a drastic change regarding the way we socially interact. Though the internet and other improvements in technology, such as cell phones, make it easier to keep in touch with people, the dynamic of social interactions is changing. Because it is so easy to keep in touch, I find that I often fail to make the effort to connect with people beyond a surface-level interaction. For example, if I haven't talked to a friend in awhile, I might send a text message or write a short note to them on facebook, but I won't actually call them or make an effort to get together to actually catch up. When I make such a minimalistic effort to keep in touch, it does keep the relationship going, but probably makes it suffer in the end, due to the lack of contact or actual conversation. I think that today, this is true for many people, and that it will increase as more and more people become comfortable with using technology and as people get used to this form of communication. I think that most people who use social networks like facebook probably have a larger number of acquaintances/friends, but that they have less of a connection with their close friends than before.

The Criminal Justice System

While reading the text for this week, I found the concept of shaming very interesting as a form of punishment. The text mentioned that Japan uses this approach to crime and that only 5% of convicted criminals spend time in jail.

Living in Japan for the past four years, I had the opportunity to observe some of their reactions to Americans, in particular to Americans living in their country. The dynamic between the US military and the Okinawans is interesting, in that the Okinawans love the Americans, but they also love to hate us. This is my personal opinion, based on my own observations. The Okinawan media focuses acutely on the individual actions of US military members, especially when a crime is committed, or allegedly committed, against an Okinawan.

I think that the Okinawans' reactions to crimes being committed by US servicemembers against Okinawans are possibly being made worse by the US military's attempts to assure Okinawans that something is being done to help the problem. For example, if a servicemember was to rob an Okinawan, the US military would react by assuring the Okinawan public that the suspect is in custody and then that the suspect, after being convicted, is in jail. This would probably not be reassuring to Okinawans, however, since they might see jail as a solution that is only used for the most dangerous of criminals because of Japan's use of reintegrative shaming in their criminal justice system.

The Japanese use of shaming and low prison rates also explain Okinawans' strong reactions to people who have been in prison. People who have spent time in prison are seen as dangerous, even more so than in American culture. Tattoos are associated with prison, so much so that in some public bath houses, tattoos are prohibited altogether.

Nature vs. Nurture

I have learned about the nature vs. nurture debate in many classroom settings, and I have had some time to think about my own views regarding this controversy. I believe that both nature and nurture play some role in the development of self, but that nurture's role is much larger. I also believe that nurture can often overpower nature, while the reverse is rarely true.

While listening to the podcast about this topic, I was taken back a bit by the speaker's opinion that people who view nurture as dominant are often people who are looking for social change. I am fairly conservative, and, after learning about the various sociological perspectives in this class, realize that I identify closely with the functionalist school of thought. Overall, I believe that society usually functions successfully, though there are definitely dysfunctional parts, and that trying to change the status quo is often futile. I can see how this view of society as a whole conflicts with a view of nurture as dominant, so it challenged me to try to figure out why I feel the way I do.

In my introspection, I found that when I think of nature vs. nurture, I think mainly of what influence my parents had on me and what influence I will have on my own children. In regards to changing society, I think that people will do what they want to do and what they think is best, regardless of whether they are told they are wrong or that a different way is better. I think that the nurture factor in society is a very specific and individualized concept. People usually raise their own children the way that they learned from their parents. Though some safety campaigns have been helpful, such as the "Back to Bed" campaign that advocates putting babies on their backs to sleep in order to reduce SIDS, most people still have attachments to what they know as best, and they are reluctant to change. Many things need to become a social norm before people will even consider changing what they know. An example of this is breastfeeding. Though it has been known for decades that breastfeeding is healthier for babies and for moms, breastfeeding is just now starting to become a social norm in America, and even then, it is only considered socially acceptable for very young babies in certain situations.

In conclusion, I do believe that nurture plays a more dominant role than nature, but that nurture is not something that can easily be changed in society.