Edmodo Seminar
Sexism's Role in Income Inequality
Sexism seems to be an underlying issue in today’s world places and economy. Women, on average, get paid 77 cents to the dollar of their male counterparts (Ferrell). There are a number of ideological reasons behind this income inequality, one of the major ones being that women are less capable then men are, and so they get an unequal pay. Is this a matter of sexism, or is it true that women do not work in the same male positions as men do, skewing the statistics?
One of the reasons a large portion of people are employed at low-paying companies is because they can’t afford a college education, and therefore aren’t eligible for high position jobs in well paying companies (Guttenplan). I find it troubling that more women have graduated from college and still are not hired in those positions that companies need. In general, women are making up less of the work force than before, and they still have more college education than men do (Women’s). This makes me wonder if the reason why they aren’t working is because they are getting unequal pay and may not even be hired for those positions they are applying for simply because of their gender and the sexist assumptions surrounding their gender.
If women were offered an equal pay to men, then there is more of a chance that there would be a surge of women in the work force, benefitting the economy in more than one way; the companies would have more workers and more innovators, and the workers would have more money to contribute to the economy. The cycle of this would then boost the economy and perhaps even send more children to college, as the parents or one of the parents have a high paying job, and could afford to send their children to college. This would open up a door for those children to work at well-paying companies who need their expertise and experience. So why aren’t women getting paid equally to men?
One of the reasons that can be easily explained is that men and women will work in different occupations and have varying wages, but around 40% of the wage inequality can’t be explained by any measurable factor (Ferrell). So there is no reason to why women earn 77 cents to every man’s dollar. This issue has not been left alone; there have been legislations that have been voted on by the U.S. Senate to attempt to equalize the pay between men and women. The reason these weren’t passed is because the Republican senators, including the female Republicans, voted against it. Susan Collins, a Republican senator said, “I think this bill would result in excessive litigation that would impose a real burden, particularly on small businesses. So I think existing laws are adequate.” (Pasulka) She’s arguing that paying both genders equally would be a burden on businesses, favoring the business over the equality of the workers. So is gender quality just another form of collateral damage that companies must sacrifice?
It appears that gender inequality is collateral damage in today’s economy. The war on women, as the Democrats have called it, is nowhere near an end. I believe that the only way for this war to end is to fight for equal pay and not stop until this is achieved. Women are subject to street harassment, ghettoization, rape culture, and overbearing gender roles subjecting them to potential partner violence. Without taking the first step to gender equality, which I believe is equal pay, how can we plan to solve these other issues that women face?
One of the reasons a large portion of people are employed at low-paying companies is because they can’t afford a college education, and therefore aren’t eligible for high position jobs in well paying companies (Guttenplan). I find it troubling that more women have graduated from college and still are not hired in those positions that companies need. In general, women are making up less of the work force than before, and they still have more college education than men do (Women’s). This makes me wonder if the reason why they aren’t working is because they are getting unequal pay and may not even be hired for those positions they are applying for simply because of their gender and the sexist assumptions surrounding their gender.
If women were offered an equal pay to men, then there is more of a chance that there would be a surge of women in the work force, benefitting the economy in more than one way; the companies would have more workers and more innovators, and the workers would have more money to contribute to the economy. The cycle of this would then boost the economy and perhaps even send more children to college, as the parents or one of the parents have a high paying job, and could afford to send their children to college. This would open up a door for those children to work at well-paying companies who need their expertise and experience. So why aren’t women getting paid equally to men?
One of the reasons that can be easily explained is that men and women will work in different occupations and have varying wages, but around 40% of the wage inequality can’t be explained by any measurable factor (Ferrell). So there is no reason to why women earn 77 cents to every man’s dollar. This issue has not been left alone; there have been legislations that have been voted on by the U.S. Senate to attempt to equalize the pay between men and women. The reason these weren’t passed is because the Republican senators, including the female Republicans, voted against it. Susan Collins, a Republican senator said, “I think this bill would result in excessive litigation that would impose a real burden, particularly on small businesses. So I think existing laws are adequate.” (Pasulka) She’s arguing that paying both genders equally would be a burden on businesses, favoring the business over the equality of the workers. So is gender quality just another form of collateral damage that companies must sacrifice?
It appears that gender inequality is collateral damage in today’s economy. The war on women, as the Democrats have called it, is nowhere near an end. I believe that the only way for this war to end is to fight for equal pay and not stop until this is achieved. Women are subject to street harassment, ghettoization, rape culture, and overbearing gender roles subjecting them to potential partner violence. Without taking the first step to gender equality, which I believe is equal pay, how can we plan to solve these other issues that women face?
Civil Disobedience Seminar
Living in America today seems to be easier than it has been before, as America is economically powerful, a world leader, and heavily militarized and therefore safe from all outside harm. The country of democracy is the strongest it’s ever been, and it’s people more silenced than ever. In the past, the voice of the individual could move oceans, but now, it’s drowned out by the sound of newscasters discussing the newest model of the iPhone. The only way to gain the attention of the media, the people, and the government, is to create a stir in the every day life; to draw attention that can’t be ignored onto one subject through the means of civil disobedience. It seems as though nonviolent direct action has lost it’s relevance, so does that mean that civil disobedience is the only way to achieve change? Or is there another form of protest rising up?
I have observed two different ways America handles civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action. In the past, nonviolent acts and acts that do not break any laws or in other ways draw attention to themselves have never quite achieved what they had meant to. Occupy Wall Street for example tried to draw attention to the huge gap between the 1% of Americans who have most of the nation’s wealth, and the 99%. Their goal was fairly simple, but because they never stood against anything illegal per se, they never got their message out to the world. What they got was the media cracking jokes about hippies and the media almost demonizing the protestors. This is one way America seems to handle these types of movements by the people; by degrading their message and giving the world a false perception of the movement. This causes confusion inside of the movement itself, as people will join it thinking one thing and others may be trying to obtain another. There was a mass amount of confusion among the protestors, as their message and their meaning was never defined by any laws or even law breaking.
The other way America handles civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action is less how America handles it and more how the people handle America. In the face of great injustice, such as when gay marriages were illegal, the people rose up and made a stand. In some places were there wasn’t a law against nor for gay marriage, many couples including my uncles got married. Their marriage was a part of a nationwide protest, bringing awareness to gay rights and the violence directed towards gay people. Because of their clear message and their drive, gay marriage has been legalized in almost every single state, and now the movement is moving on to bring awareness to all of the different kinds of sexualities. Their movement has gotten so big and well known that they have finally gotten TV shows and movies with gay characters that are not ridiculed or made to seem less. This movement holds true what Thoreau held true, “I think that we should be men first and subjects afterward.”
In the seminar, Ellen and Lawson were discussing how media plays an important role in the spread of messages and how they’re interpreted, and the changes that have been made in the media between the 1960’s and now. There are hundreds more media outlets then there ever has been, from social media to dozens of news networks on the television. Not every news network or social media outlet is going to focus on a certain issue, and at times it’s vital that certain outlets show a certain issue. The attention will not be given to any picketers on the street, but “It must be demanded by the oppressed” as Dr. King had once said. The attention must be demanded by those who are oppressed in order to shine any form of light on the situation. I think that there’s a new form of disobedience taking shape in today’s society by utilizing pathos most especially and drawing the attention of the media over to the issue or movement. Media plays a more important role than ever now and the means of disobeying laws or injustices have changed to include and possibly favor the attention of the media. I believe that this is the next step in American disobedience.
I have observed two different ways America handles civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action. In the past, nonviolent acts and acts that do not break any laws or in other ways draw attention to themselves have never quite achieved what they had meant to. Occupy Wall Street for example tried to draw attention to the huge gap between the 1% of Americans who have most of the nation’s wealth, and the 99%. Their goal was fairly simple, but because they never stood against anything illegal per se, they never got their message out to the world. What they got was the media cracking jokes about hippies and the media almost demonizing the protestors. This is one way America seems to handle these types of movements by the people; by degrading their message and giving the world a false perception of the movement. This causes confusion inside of the movement itself, as people will join it thinking one thing and others may be trying to obtain another. There was a mass amount of confusion among the protestors, as their message and their meaning was never defined by any laws or even law breaking.
The other way America handles civil disobedience and nonviolent direct action is less how America handles it and more how the people handle America. In the face of great injustice, such as when gay marriages were illegal, the people rose up and made a stand. In some places were there wasn’t a law against nor for gay marriage, many couples including my uncles got married. Their marriage was a part of a nationwide protest, bringing awareness to gay rights and the violence directed towards gay people. Because of their clear message and their drive, gay marriage has been legalized in almost every single state, and now the movement is moving on to bring awareness to all of the different kinds of sexualities. Their movement has gotten so big and well known that they have finally gotten TV shows and movies with gay characters that are not ridiculed or made to seem less. This movement holds true what Thoreau held true, “I think that we should be men first and subjects afterward.”
In the seminar, Ellen and Lawson were discussing how media plays an important role in the spread of messages and how they’re interpreted, and the changes that have been made in the media between the 1960’s and now. There are hundreds more media outlets then there ever has been, from social media to dozens of news networks on the television. Not every news network or social media outlet is going to focus on a certain issue, and at times it’s vital that certain outlets show a certain issue. The attention will not be given to any picketers on the street, but “It must be demanded by the oppressed” as Dr. King had once said. The attention must be demanded by those who are oppressed in order to shine any form of light on the situation. I think that there’s a new form of disobedience taking shape in today’s society by utilizing pathos most especially and drawing the attention of the media over to the issue or movement. Media plays a more important role than ever now and the means of disobeying laws or injustices have changed to include and possibly favor the attention of the media. I believe that this is the next step in American disobedience.
Crash/Racism Seminar
Racism, or targeted hate towards people of different colored skin, has never truly gone away. Only once and a while is it highlighted that we are still facing the same issues we were told were solved years ago. In Ferguson, a black teenager was shot by a police officer six times and left in the street for hours after his death. This prompted riots and a national discussion about racism. This conversation has sparked the question, is there really a way to eradicate racism? I believe there is a way to end racism, and that is to bring in an era of tolerance.
Our society is so focused nowadays on the idea of separation; the idea that if you are not a part of the issue at hand, you are not effected by it. We’ve become so comfortable separating ourselves from the world that we sometimes forget there were any problems to begin with. That is the wonderful bliss that white privilege gives you; it’s the soma that white people are lucky enough to possess. White people are rarely the victims of society because we have this stereotype of being wealthy, intelligent, and powerful. We don’t have to worry about getting stopped by police and going through a process called Stop and Frisk, where you are stopped in the street and checked depending on whether or not you look suspicious. More often than not, those who are stopped by the police are POC, more specifically, black people. And more often than not, those black people are innocent. The institutional racism that people of color are forced to endure can’t be solved with turning a cheek and separating ourselves. We need to face the issues head on and be willing to have our ideologies questioned.
A lot of people believe that the way to resolve this hate against people of color is to simply empower them; that you have to promote people of color in specific institutions and give favor to them. Some places have affirmative action, but the problem with that possible solution is it fuels reverse discrimination and hate towards white people. This has already been observed with the LGBT community. Being gay or transgender has become so empowered, that straight and cisgendered people are getting the hate and the discrimination that they used to face. While this may seem like a good thing, giving the white people what they gave to other races for such a long time, it could cause complications where a black person with fewer qualifications may be chosen over a white person with more qualifications because of affirmative action. If we favor black people or other people of color over white people, there is another form of racism rising.
So the big question is, how do we stop racism without putting down another race? The key to that is tolerance. As Rowan said, “We have to accept our differences and celebrate our similarities.” This means that we have to acknowledge the fact that we all come from different, all with different histories and different cultures. To overcome racism, you can’t be colorblind and you can’t over empower POC, you have to accept them. On a personal level, you have to see through stereotypes and push aside your prejudice for a moment and discover what you have in common with people from other races. It requires you to accept the differences between your cultures and your lifestyles, just as you would with people from other religions, or most recently, sexuality. We have learned to accept others’ faith and orientation, and the next step in moving forward is accepting others’ skin color.
Some people will have trouble with tolerance since a lot of people have been raised into racist households just as some people were born into homophobic households. But as the culture around them changed, they were forced to accept the fact that gay people now have a standing in the world. As more and more people become educated, gay people gain more rights and are allowed to marry the ones they love. I feel like if you educate people on racism and on tolerance, more and more people will come to accept this next step in moving forward. Because no matter the sexuality or the color of their skin, they are still human and we all have to live among each other as such. In the movie Crash, a racist, white police officer arrives at a scene where a car had flipped over. Inside was a black woman, injured and trapped in her car. He crawls into the car to attempt to rescue her when the car catches on fire. Other officers around the scene pull the officer out of the burning car, leaving the woman to die. However, this man leaps back into the car and pulls her out just before the fire spreads to the gas tank and causes it to explode. He risked his life to save her because he saw past her skin and saw the human inside of her.
The world has become so comfortable with the feeling of separation, we forget what it means to be human. To be human is to love, to learn, and to grow. “I think we miss that touch so much, that we crash into each other just so we can feel something.” The character Graham said in the movie Crash. We need to step out from the safety of our own disconnection and discover the connection we have with other people. In order to move forward and progress, the willingness to be disturbed and have your ideals shaken up is a necessity. Bryan Stevenson said, “We have in this country this dynamic where we really don't like to talk about our problems… We're constantly running into each other. We're constantly creating tensions and conflicts. We have a hard time talking about race, and I believe it's because we are unwilling to commit ourselves to a process of truth and reconciliation.” We’re scared of what this reconciliation may bring, and we’re scared of what might happen to the social structure we’ve become so familiar with. But in the words of Rosa Parks, “That’s why you’ve got to be brave, brave, brave.”
Our society is so focused nowadays on the idea of separation; the idea that if you are not a part of the issue at hand, you are not effected by it. We’ve become so comfortable separating ourselves from the world that we sometimes forget there were any problems to begin with. That is the wonderful bliss that white privilege gives you; it’s the soma that white people are lucky enough to possess. White people are rarely the victims of society because we have this stereotype of being wealthy, intelligent, and powerful. We don’t have to worry about getting stopped by police and going through a process called Stop and Frisk, where you are stopped in the street and checked depending on whether or not you look suspicious. More often than not, those who are stopped by the police are POC, more specifically, black people. And more often than not, those black people are innocent. The institutional racism that people of color are forced to endure can’t be solved with turning a cheek and separating ourselves. We need to face the issues head on and be willing to have our ideologies questioned.
A lot of people believe that the way to resolve this hate against people of color is to simply empower them; that you have to promote people of color in specific institutions and give favor to them. Some places have affirmative action, but the problem with that possible solution is it fuels reverse discrimination and hate towards white people. This has already been observed with the LGBT community. Being gay or transgender has become so empowered, that straight and cisgendered people are getting the hate and the discrimination that they used to face. While this may seem like a good thing, giving the white people what they gave to other races for such a long time, it could cause complications where a black person with fewer qualifications may be chosen over a white person with more qualifications because of affirmative action. If we favor black people or other people of color over white people, there is another form of racism rising.
So the big question is, how do we stop racism without putting down another race? The key to that is tolerance. As Rowan said, “We have to accept our differences and celebrate our similarities.” This means that we have to acknowledge the fact that we all come from different, all with different histories and different cultures. To overcome racism, you can’t be colorblind and you can’t over empower POC, you have to accept them. On a personal level, you have to see through stereotypes and push aside your prejudice for a moment and discover what you have in common with people from other races. It requires you to accept the differences between your cultures and your lifestyles, just as you would with people from other religions, or most recently, sexuality. We have learned to accept others’ faith and orientation, and the next step in moving forward is accepting others’ skin color.
Some people will have trouble with tolerance since a lot of people have been raised into racist households just as some people were born into homophobic households. But as the culture around them changed, they were forced to accept the fact that gay people now have a standing in the world. As more and more people become educated, gay people gain more rights and are allowed to marry the ones they love. I feel like if you educate people on racism and on tolerance, more and more people will come to accept this next step in moving forward. Because no matter the sexuality or the color of their skin, they are still human and we all have to live among each other as such. In the movie Crash, a racist, white police officer arrives at a scene where a car had flipped over. Inside was a black woman, injured and trapped in her car. He crawls into the car to attempt to rescue her when the car catches on fire. Other officers around the scene pull the officer out of the burning car, leaving the woman to die. However, this man leaps back into the car and pulls her out just before the fire spreads to the gas tank and causes it to explode. He risked his life to save her because he saw past her skin and saw the human inside of her.
The world has become so comfortable with the feeling of separation, we forget what it means to be human. To be human is to love, to learn, and to grow. “I think we miss that touch so much, that we crash into each other just so we can feel something.” The character Graham said in the movie Crash. We need to step out from the safety of our own disconnection and discover the connection we have with other people. In order to move forward and progress, the willingness to be disturbed and have your ideals shaken up is a necessity. Bryan Stevenson said, “We have in this country this dynamic where we really don't like to talk about our problems… We're constantly running into each other. We're constantly creating tensions and conflicts. We have a hard time talking about race, and I believe it's because we are unwilling to commit ourselves to a process of truth and reconciliation.” We’re scared of what this reconciliation may bring, and we’re scared of what might happen to the social structure we’ve become so familiar with. But in the words of Rosa Parks, “That’s why you’ve got to be brave, brave, brave.”