Teen Mom Obsession

            Earlier in American history, being a teen mom was considered taboo and rarely spoken about publicly. Now, many teen-aged women seem to view pregnancy as a claim to fame. TV shows like MTV’s Teen Mom and Teen Mom 2 glorify teen pregnancy and help bring the phenomenon into the mainstream. These shows follow the lives of teen mothers as they struggle to meet the demands of raising children.   While the shows reveal many of the unglamorous aspects of motherhood, they nonetheless romanticize teen pregnancy by making celebrities of the young women whom they spotlight.

            I admit that I watched my fair share of these shows when they first came out—fascinated by the hurdles that women my age face when confronted with the demands of motherhood.  Now, however, I worry that—by viewing these shows—I may have fueled a phenomenon that I find so troubling.  By gawking at the spectacle of young women—practically children themselves—raising their own children, I’m afraid I may have unwittingly inspired the next wave of teen mothers.  While the producers of these shows may have intended to teach young women that being a teen mom is not an easy task, I worry that the shows may impart the opposite lesson.

            In 2010, a survey was conducted to determine the levels of teen pregnancy in America. The results showed that teen pregnancy is on the rise for the first time in over a decade. In recent interviews, several teens teen mothers reported that they considered getting pregnant as a way to get on TV and possibly become famous.  Indeed, many of the participants on the show have become celebrities, gracing the covers of magazines such as People, OK!, US Weekly, in-touch and others.

            So why do we Americans have this obsession with teen mothers? Is it because we want to live vicariously through these people? Is it because we love to see others struggle? Or do we crave a glimpse into an unknown world?  I suspect that each of the more than five million viewers that tune in to show has his or her own, private motivation.  But the collective effect is disturbing.  It may help explain the fact 70% of girls and 64% of boys in America think that teen pregnancy is okay. I think it is important that we teach our young people that pregnancy is not a short cut to fame, but a life-altering experience that should not be undertaken until one is fully prepared. 

Teens On Torture

In 1973, the United States made the decision to end the draft, resulting in an all-volunteer military force.  Since then, some critics have argued that subsequent generations of Americans, who have not experienced the draft, are “soft” and “weak”, especially the young men. This may be because many young Americans who have never experienced the draft have begun to take their liberties and privileges for granted, and have never had to prepare themselves to face the challenge of being torn away from their comfortable lives to go to war.  Perhaps this is why a recent study conducted by the Daily Beast reported that teenagers in America “look more favorably on torture”, especially in the war.

According to the study, more than 60% of American teens felt that things like “water-boarding and sleep deprivation” are sometimes acceptable. The support for torture that teens expressed far outstripped the support reported by adults. It is debatable as to whether this is attributable to the end of the draft, or perhaps to the Bush Administration’s decision to normalize torture. When the Commander and Chief makes that argument that torture is acceptable, it can have a profound influence on the values of the nation. Another possible factor shaping the opinions that teens have of torture could be the influence that the media has on the popular perceptions of war. The graphic war images that are so readily accessible today on the Internet, as well as through more traditional forms of media, such as television, could be a factor in making teens numb to the horrors of war.

Another possible source of the tolerance teens show for violence may be the prevalence of graphically violent video games. Through games such as “Counter Strike” and “Call of Duty,” young boys are exposed to violence and gore, and many come to see such violence as normal and even enjoyable. A study conducted by the American Psychological Association noted that when boys play violent video games, even for just a few minutes, they display elevated levels of aggression. The boys who played violent video games reported that they felt like behaving in a more aggressive manner, and wanted to do something violent. Statistics like these make me question why we allow such violent video games to be marketed to young people.

The acceptance that American teens display toward torture is a troubling sign for the future of our nation. The prohibition on torture has been an important principle that has guided our nation throughout its history.  If the next generation is willing to accept torture, and in doing so, sacrifice their freedom from being tortured, what other rights will they be willing to give up?  Should there be more censorship of the media and video games in order to educate our teens as to the importance of civil liberties? If our society decides that tortures such as waterboarding are acceptable, only worse will come after.

Instant-aholics

            It seems that it is nearly impossible to go anywhere today and not see someone playing with some form of technology.  Whether it is a sixty-year-old woman fiddling on her new Iphone, or a seven-year-old texting on her new Blackberry, we are all hooked! While most people would argue that these new technologies provide convenient ways to get a hold of your young child or your aging mother, I wonder if perhaps we are too dependent on cell phones and other electronic gadgets.  Are we, as a society, addicted?

Gadgets have wormed their way into every aspect of our lives.  We not only use these high tech devices to call and text people, but we also use them to research things that we want to know the answer to right away. When we try to search something and it takes longer than 5 seconds, we get antsy, and complain that our device is taking too long. While my generation has seen the introduction of the Internet and high-tech cell phones, the problem is especially prevalent amongst the younger generations who have not experienced life without it. Young people today seem incapable of accomplishing anything without the help of technology. Now that cell phones function as mini computers, we have all the world’s information at our fingertips at an instant; in turn, we have all become “instant-aholics”.

Recently, I have been watching young kids at meals and in public settings to see how they interact with their surroundings. I have noticed that the majority of kids, seated at tables with their friends and families, rarely look up from their devices to make eye contact with anyone in their presence. Even walking down the street or hanging out with friends, most of their time is spent on their phones, texting or gaming.  I recently saw a young woman on horseback, texting! While I think that this is diminishing their social skills (not to mention their equestrian abilities), I am also concerned with the fact that kids, immersed as they are in their various devices, are missing all the things that are happening right before their downcast eyes.

According to a study conducted at the University of Maryland by the International Center for Media and Public Affairs, it is challenging for many young people, and, for some, impossible, to go 24 hours without their cell phones and similar technologies. The study was conducted throughout the United States, Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, and Asia, and asked over 2,000 students to go “unplugged” for the day. The researchers found that the overwhelming number of students struggled with this task, and felt that they had a clear “addiction” to technology, calling it their “drug”. Students reported that, throughout their day without their technology, they felt bored, confused, stressed, and isolated. Many of the participants reported having “hostile” and “jealous” feelings towards people who they saw on cell phones, and felt as though they were experiencing “withdraw”.

A Chilean student stated, “I didn’t use my cell phone all night. It was a difficult day… a horrible day.  After this, I CAN’T LIVE WITHOUT MEDIA! I need my social webs, my cell phone, my Mac, my mp3 always!”  Is this the battle cry of the next generation, or a cry for help?

            Based on the data that was gathered in this study, it is clear that our time spent with technology has gotten out of control, and is best understood as an addiction.  If left unaddressed, the problem is bound to get worse. These students were in their late teens and early twenties.  We must consider what will come of the next generation who are experiencing this addiction at a much younger and more vulnerable age. While technology has immense benefits, is it really worth the risk of creating an entire generation that is incapable of making eye contact with the person sitting across the table from them? 

Violence Against Women

In American society today, we have come quite a long way when it comes to women’s rights and justice for women. However, we still have far to go. Over the last few weeks, the number of stories that I have seen related to rape of women is jaw dropping. According to RAINN, the largest anti-sexual violence organization, every two minutes someone in the United States is sexually assaulted, and one out of six women has been the victim of rape. In a 2003 survey, nine out of ten rape victims were female, and 17.7 million victims of rape have been women. The fact that fifteen out of sixteen rapists will never spend a day in jail proves that the safety of women is not enough of a priority in our society today.

When I as a woman, looks at the statistics above, I can’t help but wonder why there are not more efforts being done to prevent rape or make the dangers and effects of rape more known by the public. This is a universal problem and greater efforts need to be made around the world to prevent violence against women.

Recently, there has been wide media coverage of a Lybian woman who was raped by Qaddfi’s soldiers. In places like Lybia, it is rare that a woman comes forward to claim that she has been raped due to the fact ,that not only do women have few rights, but when a woman does come forward to say that she has been raped, her family and friends often disown her due to shame and humiliation. For this woman in particular, it seemed that she wanted to do what she felt was right and make sure that the men who committed this heinous crime against her were punished for it. One would have thought that running into a hotel full of journalists would help someone in a situation like hers; however, she was taken at knife point and thrown into a car by the hotel staff who were trying to protect Qaddfi’s regime. Later she was accused of being “drunk and mentally ill”, and it was claimed that the reports of abuse and rape were her “fantasies”. While the Lybian police are holding her in custody and claim that she is being treated fairly, only time will tell if this is true.

Many people think this is a story of how low foreign troops can go, as to rape, intimidate, urinate and defecate upon, beat, and verbally abuse an innocent woman; but it is not. While this story does show the dark side of rape, we must be aware that this is not a problem that is limited to Lybia; it is a universal problem that is felt all over the world. At the same time, this horrific story occurred in Lybia, a similar case happened in Texas, the heart of America. This did not involve Qaddfi’s people; these were normal people, including a star high-school basketball player, proving that this issue is universal.

In a recent article posted by the Digital Journal, an eleven-year old girl was raped in Texas and is now being blamed for it due to her provocative appearance. Eighteen young men have been arrested for allegedly raping this eleven year old girl in Texas a few months ago. In the beginning, this case was taken as a rape case that “no one denies happened”, but it is now gaining further attention due to the fact that the young victim is being accused of “wanting this to happen” to her.

The defendants and their family members are stepping into a territory that to me is shocking; stating that the victim should be blamed because she dressed provocatively and “may” have lied about her age. A woman from the Texas area said to reporters about the case, “She lied about her age. Them boys didn't rape her. She wanted this to happen. I'm not taking nobody's side, but if she hadn't put herself in that predicament, this would have never happened."

 Really?

According to the victim’s mother, the young girl still “loves stuffed bears”. To me, it is shocking that people would stoop so low as to try to blame an eleven-year-old girl for being raped in an abandoned trailer by several young men. Who would want this to happen to them? Because this incident occurred in such a small town, and in turn affected so many people, there is a huge amount of blame and denial directed towards the victim.

Rape and violence against women occur everywhere. So why isn’t more attention paid to this issue? There is no place that is safe from rape, and no woman is beyond its reach.

Every Woman Counts

            FACT: Every minute a woman dies during childbirth or pregnancy somewhere in the world.

Maternal mortality affects people worldwide. It is most common in developing countries, but it still occurs at alarming rates within disadvantaged populations in the United States and other developed countries. Over half a million women die each year, leaving over a million children motherless and vulnerable. Many privileged Americans have trouble relating to this issue, because here in America, the incidence of maternal mortality is relatively low. Most American women have the ability to drive to a nearby hospital when they go into labor. In most American hospitals, women are put up in a nice room, with round-the-clock medical care for both mother and child, as well as private bathrooms and televisions.

Now, flash to a pregnant woman in a developing country. She doesn’t have these luxuries. She is forced to give birth in a field by herself, with no medical help or tools to ensure her safety as well as the safety of her child. This doesn’t have to be the case. Through education and awareness, we can drastically reduce maternal mortality.

Many Americans are unfamiliar with the maternal mortality crisis. Maternal mortality refers to the death of a mother due to complications during pregnancy or child birth. While many people think that such deaths are unavoidable, the fact is that nearly all of the maternal mortality deaths are easily preventable. Most women die simply because they are not close to educated healthcare professionals who can assist them through the birthing process (WRA). 

A handful of organizations are working to address this issue. The White Ribbon Alliance is a leading organization that focuses on putting an end to maternal mortality globally. According to the WRA, “Pregnancy and childbirth are the leading cause of death and disability for women in developing countries” (WRA). This is shocking when on considers that such deaths are so easily preventable. The victims usually come from underdeveloped countries throughout Africa, Asia, and Latin America. In Niger, a woman has a 1 in 7 chance of dying due to birth related causes, while a woman in Sweden has a 1 in 17,000 chance of dying due to birth related causes (WRA).

When a mother dies giving birth to a child, she leaves that child and any others she may have without their primary caregiver.   Motherless children are more vulnerable to threats such as hunger and disease, and their chances of reaching adulthood decrease. Motherless children are 10 times more likely to die prematurely than children who have not lost their mothers. (UNFPA). Thus, the death of a mother affects the entire family, and can have a negative impacts that stretch for generations.

Maternal mortality can be addressed through the proper allocation of financial resources and medical expertise. As stated previously, death during childbirth occurs because of preventable and avoidable complications during pregnancy and labor. Ending  maternal mortality requires money in order to provide educated nurses, doctors, and midwifes to ensure safety of both mother and child during pregnancy (CARE). Medical complications such as uncontrolled bleeding, obstructed labor, infection, and high blood pressure can all be addressed with proper medical care.  But many of the women who are at risk lack the most basic medical facilities.  Some are forced to give birth in cornfields or beside roads, with no sanitary tools to assist in a safe delivery of the baby and safe and proper care of the mother (UNFPA). Many of the villages in which these women live are hours away from the closest hospital, so by the time a woman enters labor, the likelihood of reaching a hospital in time is slim to none. There are also various societal factors that contribute to women dying in childbirth. Many women face gender discrimination, cultural stigmas, legal and economic hurdles, and logistical barriers that prevent them from receiving lifesaving health care (WRA).

             In order to achieve a significant reduction in maternal mortality, there needs to be a commitment, both nationally and globally, to fight to end it. Resources must be dedicated to teach skilled health workers how to properly take care of the mother and child throughout the three stages of pregnancy: before, during and after. Young women across the world should be taught proper family planning strategies, to make sure that young girls postpone their first pregnancies until they have the resources to have their babies safely. It would only cost, on average, $1.50 to send an expectant mother in a developing country a maternal health services package, which would help her  deliver a her baby safely (Huffington Post). The United Nations Millennium Development program has sought to address maternal mortality, and has made their Goal #5: “to reduce maternal mortality by 75% and to achieve universal access to reproductive health services by 2015” (WRA). Unfortunately for the UN and for the victims of maternal mortality, this goal is still far being realized.

            Organizations such as White Ribbon Alliance and CARE have done tremendous work in creating awareness of the issue of maternal mortality, but far more remains to be done.  Maternal mortality is global problem that requires a global solution. According to the White Ribbon Alliance, the United States, with its vast resources, has the potential to make a tremendous impact on this issue.  Just as the U.S. has made great strides in combatting HIV/AIDS by placing the disease on the President’s Emergency Plan, the U.S. can play a key role in diminishing maternal mortality.  Every American can make a difference by becoming aware of the issue and pushing for change. By supporting this effort, you can save a woman’s life. You can prevent her death. You can be the change.

If you yourself want to help, you can donate to charities such as the White Ribbon Alliance that will use your money to promote awareness, provide the proper birthing tools and medical supplies, and educate nurses, doctors, and midwifes to ensure the safety of mothers throughout the world. (VIDA)

A Voice for All

             In a move he must have thought would strike an inspiring blow for freedom of speech, Orange County District Attorney Tony Wrackaukas filed criminal charges against eleven students for . . . speaking their mind and fighting for something they believed in.  The occasion for this outrage?  A speech in February 2010 by Israeli ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, which the eleven apparently disrupted. 

The District Attorney's actions are absurd.  Since when has expressing one's views become a crime in America? The prosecution of the students is an attack on the most precious of American liberties--the freedom of speech.  By silencing the protestors, we undermine the essential freedoms upon which our country was founded. 

In February of this year, eleven of the protestors were formally charged by the Orange County District Attorney for the misdemeanor crimes of conspiring to disrupt a meeting and actually disrupting a meeting. If convicted they could face fines and a jail sentence of up to six months. Their arrest and prosecution have sparked a debate in Orange County and beyond.

            District Attorney Wrackaukas’ decision reflects poorly on his office, Orange County, and the United States as a whole. Conspiring to disrupt a meeting and actually then disrupting the meeting should not be illegal and definitely not something one should end up in jail for; especially in a nation that has been founded upon free speech. The students were in fact trying to have their voices heard in a country that often tends not to listen to the Muslim perspective.

            According to District Attorney Wrackaukas, students deserve to be prosecuted for having prevented Ambassador Oren from having the opportunity to speak. "In our democratic society,"  Mr. Wrackaukas said with no sense of irony, "we cannot tolerate a deliberate, organized, repetitive and
collective effort to significantly disrupt a speaker who hundreds assemble to hear." 

When it comes to what Wrackaukas says, freedom of speech means ‘shut up and listen’.

This argument sounds thin to me, as it probably would have to our founding fathers. Would Mr. Wrackaukas have tolerated a “deliberate, organized and collective effort to” dump tea into the Boston Harbor? It seems likely that he would have prosecuted our founding fathers in the name of King George.

            Above all other freedoms, our four fathers value the freedom of assembly, and the freedom of speech. They recognize that these freedoms were essential for a democratic society. It is through free speech that abuses can be identified and grievances can be expressed peacefully. It seems that the Muslim students at UC Irvine have a better grasp of this fact than does the District Attorney.

            Freedom of speech is often most important when that speech is unpopular or threatening to the powers that are in place. With the ongoing wars between the United States and opposing forces in Iraq and Afghanistan and now Libya, many Americans are not receptive Muslim voices. In this post 9-11 era, many Americans feel threatened by Islam and would like to silence Muslim voices. They see Muslim voices as “un-American”, nothing could be farther from the truth.

As a nation of immigrants, America has continually been reinvigorated by waves of immigration from every corner of the world. Immigrants from Europe, from Asia, from Africa, and the Americas, have come to our country and brought their own perspectives and raised their voices to push America farther down the road of freedom and equality.

 We have in our nation more than six million Muslims, and they represent a large and growing percentage of the worlds population. Their perspective is valuable here in America, and its expression will help America to behave responsibly within the larger world community. To silence the Muslim voice in America will undermine our democratic society and our standing in the world.

            By respecting Muslim voices in America we will not be committing a radical departure from traditional American values, instead we will be returning to the values upon which our nation was built.

Free Speech

            The United States Supreme Court recently upheld the rights of members of a Baptist church to protest at the site of funerals of American soldiers. The justices ruled 8 to 1 that the protestors were allowed to shout statements such as  “Thank God for dead soldiers” and “AIDS cures fags”, based upon the First Amendment. While such statements may seem hateful and unjustified, enduring offensive speech is the sacrifice that we must make as members of a free society.  

            At first glance, the angry slogans of the Baptist church members may seem like the sort of vicious attack that should be outlawed in a civil society. After all, the soldiers who were being buried at these funerals were young men and women who had made the ultimate sacrifice in order to protect the freedom and values of their country. Their families had gathered to honor their sacrifice, and they did not deserve to have these ceremonies disrupted by vicious and bigoted attacks. However, had the Supreme Court banned the protester’s right to free speech, they would have jeopardized the very values for which these young soldiers died.

            Freedom of speech was so important to the founding father’s that they dedicated the First Amendment to its protection. The founding fathers lived much of their lives within a society that did not allow free -speech—a society in which members were persecuted for speaking against the tyranny of the British king. The founding fathers had the courage to speak against the king despite the risks, and eventually forged a new society in which citizens were allowed to speak their minds and have their voices heard without penalty. To ban free speech—even speech that may seem misguided and hateful—would be to break with the traditions upon which this nation was founded.

            It is in this light that we should view, with some skepticism, the passage of laws that bans “hate speech”. Laws against hate speech in the United States generally ban verbal or written statements that insight hatred or violence against individuals based upon their race, gender, ethnicity, sexuality, etc. These sorts of laws put two of America’s core values into conflict; tolerance, and freedom.  America is a diverse country, composed of immigrants from all corners of the world.  It is important that we learn to respect our differences. But this tolerance may at times conflict with personal freedom. America has always prized individual freedom, granting citizens the right to free speech, free assembly, the pursuit of happiness etc. As a society, we must acknowledge that we cannot always have it both ways. If you have truly free speech, people may at times say harsh, intolerant things, and if we ban such statements, we limit the freedom of people to express themselves. Given this dilemma, it is best to follow the wisdom of our founding fathers and protect the First Amendment and the right to free speech.

            As traumatizing as it may be to listen to verbal attacks at the funerals of those who have fought for our country, it is the price that we all must pay as members of a free society. As Chief Justice John Roberts stated in the hearing, "Speech is powerful. It can stir people to action, move them to tears of both joy and sorrow, and—as it did here—inflict great pain. On the facts before us, we cannot react to that pain by punishing the speaker".  By tolerating hateful speech, we protect the liberty of every citizen to speak his or her mind.

Trafficked

In the world today, there are over 27 million people enslaved. The issue of human trafficking is a global issue, and it rears its ugly head in some surprising places.     I was shocked to learn that human trafficking is not a problem restricted to poverty-stricken areas in the developing world—it happens right here.   According to CAST (Coalition to Abolish Slavery and Trafficking), an estimated 10,000 women are being held in underground brothels in Los Angeles today. As a young woman living in Los Angeles, I find it horrifying that this is happening so close to where I live, and that so few people seem to know about it. Below is the story of a woman whom I met who experienced slavery first-hand.  Her story is unforgettable.

Konthi was 19, and had just finished high school in her home country of Sri Lanka. She was looking for a job through an agency in Singapore, and they found her one as a housekeeper.   Konthi’s mother was too sick to work, and her father was not making enough money as a carpenter to support the family. Her sister had been married off, and left her parents with no steady income.  Now it was up to Konthi to find work.

In 1996, she began working as a housekeeper for four adults at a house in Singapore. In 1998, she was asked to travel on vacation to Los Angeles with the couple for whom she had been working.  She was taken to the couple’s daughter’s home here, and told how to keep the house clean by a fellow housekeeper in the daughter’s home. Shortly after they arrived in Los Angeles, the couple from Singapore left to Canada and never returned, leaving Konthi at their daughter’s home.  Over the course of the following two years, during which time she was never paid,  Konthi she was forced to care for the children and pets, keep the home clean, wash the cars, endure the unpredictable temper of her boss, sew clothing, and, at times, clean the marble floors of the house with nothing but a toothbrush.  She was never allowed out of the house. Konthi asked daily for her pay, so she could send the money back to her family in Sri Lanka, but her boss gave her nothing.   When she was finally allowed to send her family a letter, she received a reply which stated that her father had passed away while she had been gone, leaving her mother alone. Konthi begged to be allowed to go home,  but her boss refused.

On May 15, 2000, Konthi’s luck changed. There was a knock on the door of her bosses’ home.   Just as they always did when company came, the family told Konthi to go upstairs and lock herself in the closet so no one would get suspicious.   Later, her boss came upstairs and told her that the IRS had come by, the she had not allowed them in.. When the IRS returned to the house several times, the boss put Konthi in one of her own nice dresses and told the IRS that Konthi was a visiting  niece. When the IRS asked for Konthi’s passport and learned that she didn’t have one, Konthi was immediately taken away by an immigration agent. That was Konthi’s lucky day.   She was introduced to a woman named Jenny who worked at the CAST offices, who took her to a safe house and had her tell her story in court.

Just when Konthi thought that she was safe from her boss, she noticed that when she was in court, the interpreter wasn’t telling the judge everything she was saying.  Konthi complained and told CAST that she felt like she wasn’t being represented properly.  She was right.  She later found out that the interpreter had been approached in the courthouse parking lot by Konthi’s boss, who told her what to say in court so that the boss would not get in trouble for mistreating Konthi.

Eventually, Konthi was able to tell the truth to the legal system, and she was given a TVISA, which allowed her to stay in the United States temporarily.   During this period, she was not allowed to travel out of the country, but she took the risk and went back to see her family in Sri Lanka. She was able to stay there and take care of her dying mother. 

In April 2002, Konthi moved into her own apartment and took nursing assistant courses.   She started working in a nursing home and is taking classes at a local college to get her RN degree. She sends money back to her sister in Sri Lanka and has paid for all of her nieces’ and nephews’ education. Konthi is a member of the CAST caucus and loves her role as advocate, telling her story to increase public awareness of the issue of human trafficking.

There are millions of more stories similar to Konthi’s. In my opinion, the government should make prosecuting human traffickers a higher priority. It is not only women that are trafficked—men are trafficked as well, and in some cases even young children. A recent report cited human trafficking as the third largest criminal industry in the world. More than 1.2 million young people are trafficked every year, and if we don’t stand up and demand something be done, the number will likely continue to rise. Last year the United Nations launched a petition that would encourage people to take a pledge towards preventing the trafficking of people. While acts like this are positive, it is up to law makers and government officials to create legislation to prevent trafficking. At the end of our conversation, I asked Konthi what she thought the solution was.  She said, “Education through prevention.” If there were one thing that Konthi could tell women in foreign countries, it would be that they have rights as human beings and do not have to be slaves.

Self-Definition

One of the most striking features of the 21^st century is the trend towards self-definition. Historically, our culture has assigned roles for its various members—roles which these members were expected to fill. These roles crossed both the public and private spheres, whether it be the hard-working father and the stay-at-home mom, or the corporate manager and the union plumber. As these roles disintegrate, people are allowed greater freedom to define themselves in their own terms. This process of self-definition allows people to express themselves more fully and to pursue their individual passions toward their own ends. This shift may be seen in countless movements and trends throughout our culture. Virtually every segment of our society has been swayed by the trend towards honoring the individual. Three examples will serve to show the scope and depth of this change. First, over the last fifty years, women have progressed in terms of their ability to define themselves, personally and professionally. While their career options have expanded dramatically throughout the previous century, women are now striving to define female beauty in ways that promote their health and well-being. Second, the gay community has made great progress in defining themselves to the larger community.  Historically, gays have been stigmatized, but more recently, gays have made great strides in earning equal rights and a greater acceptance within the broader community. Third, the recent events in Egypt and throughout the Middle East show that the trend towards self-definition is not restricted to America or the “Western world”; rather, it is a global trend. Empowered by tools of mass communication via the Internet, individuals from all nations and walks of life are finding solidarity with others and discovering the confidence to define themselves to the world.

            Ever since the famous model Twiggy came onto the fashion scene, thin has been “in.” Before this, women were celebrated for having different bodies, curvy and thin, and all types were accepted and most importantly, considered beautiful. In today’s society, it’s hard not to notice the various advertisements and images that the media bombards us with daily. Within these various images, one will notice that the majority of female models are excessively thin, with perfect hair and makeup, representing an impossible beauty ideal that should be desired by all. While these kinds of women might be preferred in the fashion world, one might ask oneself what kind of women are preferred in the real world? The reality is that most women do not look even close to the women in the media and in the fashion magazines, yet we are told to emulate these women in order to be accepted and thought of as pretty in society.  Many women purchase beauty products in the hopes of attaining this impossible ideal. Yet, several thousand dollars later, they find themselves a bit short of cash and not looking anything like the woman on the billboard on Sunset Boulevard. In 2004, Dove launched a campaign to change this trend and celebrate real women of all different shapes and sizes. Dove wanted to provide women with confidence and let them know that they don’t have to be a size 0 in order to be considered beautiful. It was a campaign that was challenging the norm and stereotype of what women should look like, and instead showing people what women really do look like.  Dove worked with groups of women all over the country, both young and old, to see how they were feeling about the huge amount of pressure to be thin. They discovered that only 2% of women in the United States consider themselves to be beautiful. It is fairly obvious that there are more than 2% of women that are beautiful in the world, so what is making the 98% of women in America feel that they are not good enough to be seen as beautiful? More importantly, what can be done to prevent young girls from feeling this pressure and knowing that the images that they are comparing themselves to are far from real? The public interest raised by the Dove campaign spurred people in the fashion industry to respond to the concerns of women. Famous model Crystal Renn came out with a book called “Hungry,” discussing her battle with anorexia and bulimia as a working model in the fashion industry. Renn writes:

I was hardly alone in my descent into weight obsession and madness. Five to 10 million Americans have eating disorders. Even women without clinical disorders spend a heartbreaking amount of time obsessing about their weight, hating their bodies and thinking that if they were only thinner, their lives would be richer, fuller, happier. (ABC NEWS 1)

Hearing this from a woman who has experienced these pressures and fallen into eating disorders, and who has learned to live a healthier life is refreshing and relatable. After receiving treatment for her disorders, Renn came back to the fashion industry as a plus size model, proving that you can still be curvy and happy and be in the fashion industry at the same time. She showed young girls around the world that she was just like them in feeling like you can only be pretty and happy if you are skinny. By telling her journey, Renn hopes that young girls will learn that they need to embrace their figures and be confident in their own skin to be beautiful. After finding that the discussion of body image and pressures was a popular one, the Dove Campaign for Real Beauty took further steps to start the Self-Esteem Campaign.  Focusing mainly on America’s female youth, videos and conversations were started to show to young girls how diluted the images are that they trust so much.  Since then, women’s bodies and appearances have been the subject of conversations amongst many of the major fashion designers, especially during fashion week. The CFDA (Council on Fashion Designers of America) has expressed concern about the pressure put on women in the fashion industry to be thin. Larger issues have been raised about women in the larger media world, i.e., in Hollywood, TV shows, fashion, and much more. The real concern here is to break down negative stereotypes that are confining women, and allow women to define beauty for themselves. There is still a huge amount to be done, not only in the fashion industry, but also in the media, to make these industries more responsive to the perspectives of women. Hopefully, then, women of all different shapes and sizes can be confident and celebrated, and recognized for the unique beauty that each possesses.

Just as women have made strides in defining the “ideal body image”, same-sex couples have made advances in redefining society’s definition of marriage. In November 2008, California voters passed Proposition 8, which defined marriage as being exclusively between a man and a woman, thereby banning gay marriage within the state. This act was the culmination of a long campaign on the part of conservative groups who sought to ban gay marriage. Opponents of gay marriage claim that since the traditional definition of marriage is a bond between a man and a woman only, gay couples should not be allowed to marry. They further argue that gay marriage would confuse and damage children’s understanding of the meaning of marriage and confuse children regarding their sexual orientation. Opponents of gay marriage are fighting to preserve the traditional, societal definition of marriage, forcing other members to conform to it or be excluded from it. Those who favor gay marriage reject this perspective. They argue that acknowledging the right of same sex couples to form marriages in no way harms heterosexual marriages, nor would same sex marriages negatively impact children’s understanding of what marriage is. Gay couples argue that they should be allowed to enjoy the same legal benefits as heterosexual couples. More importantly gays feel they have a right to have their unions recognized on an equal status as the unions of heterosexual couples.  The battle against Proposition 8 was a battle to allow gay couples the right to define the nature of their unions. The union between same-sex couples goes beyond the issue of gay rights—it is an issue of civil rights. If the prejudices of the majority are allowed to define the rights of minorities, then no one in our society is truly free.  

Both sides in this debate, use the Internet and media to rally their troops. The Proposition 8 campaign used Internet forms as well as traditional media i.e. television and radio ads, to organize supporters of the proposition. Similarly, opponents of the proposition, spread their message via the Internet and other forms of media. While much of the battle was waged in the media, the case was decided in the courts. Judge Vaughn R. Walker presided, and decided in favor of the opponents of Proposition 8. Walker ruled that there was no legitimate reason to discriminate against individuals based upon their sexual orientation. Walker determined that Proposition 8 represented  “a private moral view that same sex couples are inferior to opposite sex couples” (Walker 135). Walker noted that such a view violated the 14^th Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection under the law, and was therefore unconstitutional. His ruling was a victory for same sex couples who longed to have their full rights recognized by the larger community.  As importantly, it was a major step forward in culture’s embrace of the willingness to grant each citizen the right to define him or herself. As Jeffrey Zarillo, one of the plaintiffs against Proposition 8, testified:

Coming out is a very personal and internal process. You have to get to the point where you’re comfortable with yourself, with your own identity and who you are. (Zarrillo, 25)

The defeat of Proposition 8 furthers the process of dismantling cultural stereotypes and liberating individuals. As noted earlier, this trend is not just a national phenomenon but a global one. 

In recent weeks, the desire for self-definition has inspired pro-democracy protests throughout the Middle East. After decades of autocratic rule, the youth in Tunisia organized mass protests against the regime of then President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. These protests drove Ben Ali from office. The pro-democracy contagion then spread to other youth groups throughout the region, including Bahrain, Jordan, and Egypt. After only two weeks of mostly peaceful protests in Cairo and across the country of Egypt, the thirty-year reign of President Mumbarak came to an end. Other protest movements are still underway—most notably in Libya—where the young are rising up against the forty year reign of Muammar al-Gaddafi. While each of these movements is a response to the unique conditions in each country, they share many characteristics. First, a great deal of the organization of the protests has been conducted through internet forums. For instance, the protests in Egypt were largely organized through Facebook groups and Twitter, as well as various other social networking sites. Second, all of the protests were well organized and highly resilient, reflecting the shared energy and expertise of a generation that has learned to share their thoughts and information online. As David D. Kirkpatrick writes in his New York Times article “The Group of 15 Who Led Egpyt’s Protests”, “They brought a sophistication and professionalism to their cause—exploiting the anonymity of the Internet to elude the secret police. “  Protestors through out the Middle East are sharing information, and learning from each other. Third, each of the protests has, at its core, a desire for greater individual freedom for the citizens of the region. Again and again, from Tunisia to Egypt to Libya, the youth have demanded the right to have governments that reflect their desires for a brighter future. Again, Kirkpatrick writes in his article,

Most of the group are liberals or leftists, and all, including the Brotherhood members among them, say they aspire to a western style constitutional democracy where civic institutions are stronger than individuals.

The hope is that these civic institutions will be more responsive to the individual desires of the citizens, allowing people throughout the Middle East to define themselves and their future. Just as the gay community seeks a voice and the recognition of their basic rights in America, and women seek the right to change the societies’ traditional definition of beauty, citizens through out the Middle East are demanding the right to have their views and desires reflected in their governments.

            Overall, the trend toward self-definition is a profound and far-reaching cultural phenomenon. Whether you are gay who longs to have the right to define the nature of your most intimate relationship, or you are a normal woman who wants to embrace her curves and still be considered beautiful, or you are a person living in Egypt and want your concerns to be reflected in the form and conduct of your government, these all are people longing for the right of self-definition. Places in the world today that are choosing not to conform to the preferred ways of democracy and individuals rights might find themselves in a similar situation to those in Egypt and the Middle East. It is only right that people all over the world—men, women, gay or straight—be allowed to voice their opinions and share their ideas. Every corner of the world is being transformed by the force of self-definition. The fact that this blog is being written on the Internet is a reflection of this general trend. Using an online form to present my own views and to share them with others is a perfect example of self-definition.  My generation has grown up with the expectation that they can express themselves through a variety of media and find an immediate audience for their views.  We are therefore blessed with the opportunity to define ourselves in the terms that suit us best.  It is not surprising that one of most admired figures of our generation is Lady Gaga. Much of Lady Gaga’s appeal is based on her ability to define herself in ways that shock and fascinate the public—for instance, arriving at the MTV Video Music Awards in a dress made out of meat. She later explained that the reason for her wearing a dress made out of meat was to symbolize the rights of people in the world. Gaga said, “If we don't stand up for what we believe in and if we don't fight for our rights, pretty soon we're going to have as much rights as the meat on our own bones. And, I am not a piece of meat.” It is clear from her explanation that Lady Gaga is passionate about her own views, and enjoys her ability to express herself freely. The same behaviors that shock many are helping to empower the younger generation and to instill in them a sense of their right to define themselves and their future.

Thin

It is difficult to turn on the TV, flip through a magazine, or walk down the street in any American city without being bombarded with images of so called “perfect women." These images put pressure on women, both young and old, to look thin, beautiful, and flawless. This pressure is put forward by advertisers, and transferred to the mass of consumers through models who are starved and photo shopped into what the advertisers consider to be the ideal female form. As a woman living in Los Angeles, trying to avoid these images is impossible. On my way to school in the morning, I pass at least fifteen billboards covered with slim, sleek women. Nearly all of the models are size 0, and almost none reflect the body type of an average American woman. This certainly was the case for Paris model Isabella Caro, who battled with Anorexia Nervosa from the time she was 13 to her recent death at the age of 28. Caro, who was a fashion model, got her claim to fame in 2007 when she appeared in a controversial “No- Anorexia” ad campaign shot by Oliviero Toscani. She later wrote a book about her battle with the disease, called The Little Girl Who Didn’t Want to Get Fat, documenting her struggles within the modeling world, including the development of anorexia. She blamed her development of the disease mainly on her mother, Marie, who killed herself after her daughter's death. She wrote that when she was a child, her mother was depressed and took her depression out on Caro. She kept Caro in diapers until she was 7-years-old, dressed her in clothing that was too small for her, and kept her locked inside her apartment because her mother told her “fresh air makes children grow." As a way to rebel against her mother’s actions and feel like she had control over something, Isabelle began to starve herself. She describes how she only ate tiny chocolate squares and corn flakes to make sure that she stayed thin. Caro had many close calls with death due to her disease.  Her weight fluctuated from a maximum of 73 pounds, to a low, in 2006, of 55 pounds, at which point she slipped into a coma. When she died in November 2010, she was in the hospital for a respiratory disease; the rest of her causes of death are unknown. Caro spent most of the end of her life doing various interviews about her illness and how much pressure is put on women in the fashion industry to be unhealthy and deathly thin. She recalls going on several go-sees with various designers weighing 73 pounds and being told that, in order to be in their fashion show, she would have to loose 10 pounds to even find work in the fashion business. Caro immediately lost the weight plus another 10 pounds. 
 

Stories like Isabelle’s happen too frequently and often go unnoticed in the fashion industry today. In London, fashion week organizers have taken steps in the right direction, banning size 00 from walking the catwalks. In Milan and Madrid, they have made it a rule that a model must have a body mass index of at least 18, although anything below 20 is considered unhealthy. The CFDA (Council of Fashion Designers of America) in America has expressed concern about the pressure put on women in the fashion industry to be thin, but nothing has been done on the part of the designers. I find the images of women like Isabelle Caro’s heartbreaking. No one should feel that they need to be that thin in order to be noticed in society or to be considered fashionable and beautiful. I believe it is the responsibility of the fashion industry to take the next step in the right direction and celebrate women of all shapes and sizes. They should promote models of healthy weights who could serve suitable role models for young women. It is ridiculous that fashion designers require women to be like “hangers” for their clothing, not distracting the viewers from the clothes with their healthy, feminine forms. It is disappointing to me as a woman that most of these images that we are told to look like are photo-shopped to the point of impossibility. The fashion industry seems to regard average women of being unworthy of being admired. What kind of a message does this send to young girls? If we as a society want to stop the amount of young girls and women becoming anorexic, then it is our job as women and men to reject these images and ask for something more real and healthy.

Sargent Shriver: The Marriage Between Chruch and State

Ever since the founding of the first English colonies in North America, a debate has raged over the competing roles of the church and the state in society. Some have argued that the church has an important role to play in the governance of society, while others have argued that there should be an inviolable wall between church and state. Stephen Mack traces this debate in his article “Wicked Paradox: The Cleric as Public Intellectual”. Mack writes about the distinct tension between the religious sphere and the political sphere in America today. He notes that the foundations of our democratic society are rooted in the religious convictions of America’s founders. While he argues that religion and politics can’t merge completely with out damaging both, Mack maintains that it is not possible or desirable to bar the fundamental beliefs that form the foundation of religion from our public life. He explains that many leaders, such as the leaders of the great reform movements from the Abolition Movement, to the War on Poverty, were inspired by their religious beliefs. Sargent Shriver is an example of just such a leader. While serving publically in the administrations of John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson, he drew personal inspiration from his faith. His deeply-held Catholic values helped guide his public service.

            Shriver served his country during a time of tremendous upheaval. In the 1960’s, the Civil Rights struggle was creating great tensions at home while the Cold War was being waged throughout the world. It was a time that tested America’s values. As a public servant, Shriver struggled to carry out policies that were effective in a practical, secular sense. However, in everything he did, he was guided by his religious convictions. Shriver attended mass every morning without fail. He was renowned for asking where the local church was wherever he traveled. Shriver was a big believer that in order to properly express our love for God and others we must be servants. Shriver thought that the choices that we made religiously and our level of faith were a necessary part of our existence as humans. He believed that our involvement in religion should be thought of as a way to recognize our shared values and to spark conversation especially in the political realm. Ultimately, Shriver thought that faith was the perfect way to form “pathways to peace” and should never be used to create barriers between us. One of the values that Shriver drew from his faith and that guided him throughout his public service was the principle of non-violence. As Shriver stated in his address to the A.M.E Bishops Council in 1966,

Non-violence is only a prohibition. It is negative. What we need is an affirmation—a way of acting that makes sense that can capture the spirit and allegiances of men. I believe that in the Civil Rights movement, in the War on Poverty, in the Peace Corps we have found that affirmative faith.

In this statement, Shriver shows that he drew no boundary between his personal faith and his public service; rather, his faith served as the cornerstone in his work to further the public good. Shriver felt humbled by his duty to serve his fellow man, and it was this religious duty that inspired him to pursue his various campaigns.

     As the career of Sargent Shriver exemplified, the work of many public figures is ultimately founded in their personal faith. Their religious convictions represent their core values that guide how they treat their fellow man and define what it means to struggle for a better world. To remove these core values from their public service would be to destroy the very foundation upon which their sense of community rests.

Sargent Shriver: The Role of the Public Intellectual

In his article, “the ‘Decline’ of Public Intellectuals?”, Stephen Mack notes that many members of the American intelligentsia worry that intellectuals have lost their standing in American culture. Mack observes that many of the intelligentsia think of intellectuals as a class in decline. However, Mack argues that intellectuals are not important as a class; rather, they are important for the work that they do. That work is to generate criticism that may lead to improvements in our society. Intellectualism is a process that does not belong to a limited class of people. In a democracy, it should be encouraged in the citizenry as a whole. An example of a public intellectual who fits this mold is the late Sargent Shriver. In his work on the behalf of the Peace Corps, the War on Poverty, and various other campaigns, Shriver brought his cultural insights to the masses to improve the American society.

            Shriver’s first public role was as the head of the newly founded Peace Corps under President Kennedy. He was appointed as leader in 1961 and charged with the task of developing an organization that would allow young Americans to volunteer to be sent through out the world to assist in development to those in need, as well as serve as ambassadors of the United States. While there was early skepticism, Shriver won over doubters with his passion and eloquence. In describing the mission of the Peace Corps, Shriver stated,

Be servants of peace. Work humbly, persistently and intelligently. Weep with those who are sorrowful. Care for those who are sick. Serve your neighbors. Serve your towns. Serve the poor. That is your challenge.

Shriver recognized that the key to promoting peace and good relations through out the world was to serve the interests of other countries. Shriver further recognized that in order for this idea to take root, he would have to promote it publically. His ability to inspire young people through out America helped develop the Peace Corps into an enduring program which has helped millions of people through out the world and has helped to put on display the best qualities of Americans.

            After heading the Peace Corps, Shriver next helped to lead Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty.  Again, this campaign drew from an intellectual movement. Johnson, Shriver, and others recognized that poverty was a social evil that needed to be addressed directly. Shriver recognized that poverty was a symptom of imbalances within our society as a whole and not just a reflection of the problems within poor communities.  Therefore, Shriver helped lead a multi-pronged campaign to address such issues as access to education, job training, and affordable housing. As Shriver stated to the National Bar Association in 1966, 

If the War on Poverty means anything, it is a statement that we must look – not just to the poor—but to the whole cloth too—and even to the loom. The whole fabric of our society must be rewoven—and the patterns we must weave are patterns of justice, opportunity, dignity, and mutual respect.

Shriver’s involvement in the war on poverty helped lead to the establishment of many successful programs such as Head Start, Job Corps, VISTA, Legal services for the Poor and much more. It was Shriver’s ability to inspire others that allowed his ideas to spread and transform the country.

            Sargent Shriver serves as a model for the role that public intellectuals can play in our society. Shriver was an intellectual that who did not remain in an ivory tower. Shriver believed that his insights should be put into action and shared with the larger society to have the greatest effect possible. Shriver fits into Mack’s idea of a public intellectual according to his article. Far from being an intellectual snob, Shriver believed in bringing his messages to the masses to make America the best place it could be.

Welcome

Welcome to my blog! This is where I will post things that I find interesting, important, and hot topics I think you should know about. Enjoy!