Group 7 Response (Jill Shah)

The biggest issue according to me is the unequal distribution of wealth. That according to me is the most important factors that lead to this protest. If the wealth was distributed evenly between the rich and the poor  then this type of a problem would not have taken place in the first place. 65% of the nation's wealth is given to the top 1% of the people and the rest distributed to the 99%. Hence we get the 99% and 1% slogan for the Occupy protests. This unjust and unequal treatment of government has gotten to the nerves of the people which is but obvious and expected. One cannot keep pushing another around for much long without expecting a reaction. Every action has an equal an opposite reaction, hence proven.
I honestly don't think that celebrities participation in this protest doesnt do much because the celebrities basically are looking for exposure for their own interest and publicity. If this would not have been on the news this much, no celebrity would have even cared enough to pay attention to it or even get involved.














9

Group 7 'Occupy Wall Street' Response

I think the most important issue here is the distribution of wealth.  The rich become richer and the poor become poorer and this is an issue that shouldn't be ignored.  The fact that republicans want to cut taxes for the wealthy and increase taxes for the middle class makes absolutely NO sense.  Who in their right mind would support this?  I think the wealthy need to get taxed because they have the resources to pay.  Give the lower and middle classes opportunities for learning, earning and becoming educated.  Instead of state budget cuts on public education, the government need to stop funneling money into the pockets of wall street millionaires. 

I think the participation of celebrities does nothing to bridge the gap between the statistical numbers.  Celebrities seek publicity and what's better than showing support for what your fans care about?  Because it might bring more public and governmental attention to the issue, I don't necessarily stand against it.

Group 7's 'Occupy Wall Street' Repsonse

The issue that I believe to be of most importance is the coalition of the majority making their voices be heard and fighting for the cause through social movements. I personally believe that social movements, slowly but surely, will affect and alter the modes of privatization as well as the unequal distribution of wealth. So long as people come together and make a concerted effort, change will occur.

Just because celebrities are participating in or showing their "support" at occupy movements does not mean that they truly care. Celebrities just may be promoting themselves so that people can support their business ventures. After all, celebrities such as Kanye and Russel Simmons are in the music business to make profits. However, I may be wrong and they just may earnestly be interested in the people's welfare. Nevertheless, celebrities' appearances at Occupy movements will not close the gap between the 99% and the 1% because they are not distributing their wealth but are merely showing up.

Group 6 Presentation: Female Soldiers

          It has only been about a little over six decades that women were officially allowed and permitted to contribute to our nation’s security. After a very long struggle for women to be allowed to contribute and aid in times of war, finally on June 12, 1948 President Truman signed a bill passed by congress. That bill would soon be the Women’s Armed Services Integration. With great effort and triumph the women of our nation had finally made it possible to serve in moments of war and aid by enrolling in the United States Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps.

         Unfortunately, for our brave women, serving our country has cost them more than just leaving their families behind, but being at a higher risk of being sexually assaulted. Sadly according to the statistics in the year 2010 there were about three thousand reports of sexual assaults reported. Alarming right? Now imagine how many crimes of sexual assaults were not reported. How is it possible that in these times women are still being the target for men! It has been two years since the last estimate of assaults, for in the beginning of 2012 statistics say that only 15% of women make up the armed forces, yet 95% of sexual assault victims are women. Unbelievably, breathe taking at such alarming numbers!

            Those courageously women who speak up against sexual assault, unfortunately are diagnosed with psychological problems. As mentioned in the power point by Annice, Stephanie Schroeder, one of the many victims, after sharing her assault experience was diagnosed and discharged of her benefits as a veteran. Not only those has this affected the victims financially, but emotionally and mentally as well. Only those who speak are sometimes treated. What about those who make it a secret? Who and how are they treated to overcome this awful experience?  Not only are the women being left untreated and exposed to psychological problems but so are the abusers. They return back home free of charge and ready to assault someone another women, or even children. Crimes like these need to be stopped. Women in the military must be protected by all means in return of their services!

            One last thing to touch on, equal treatment! By no means are women in the armed forces of lesser value than men. Therefore, the same treatment and benefits that wounded/hurt men would receive should also be imposed in the women. Just alone after returning home many soldiers are diagnosed with psychological issue due to the violent scene they have experienced. Imagine being a woman having to live and survive such violent scenes, and then trying to cope and overcome sexual assault! Assaulted women most definitely need to be treated and help, not just stripped off their benefits and ignored.

            This has been and will continue to be a growing problem until it is taken care of and resolved! Although,  Defense Secretary Leon Panetta promises to work effortlessly to protect women and everyone equally from sexual assault, this problem such not have been let alone to escalate to such high numbers, after all we are supposed to be treated and served equally, which apparently in the armed forces it is not the issue!

Now think about…

1)       Are women really being treated equally (regarding health care, mental care, financial care) after being in combat such as men?

2)      What reason might assaulted women fear that hold down them from speaking up?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOeQoAOhWIs&feature=player_detailpage

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=jrLGrJFMDic

Skin Lightening Debate 1 Response

Indian men are frequently becoming the targets of the skin lightening cream industry because of the notion of colorism. A man’s worth is primarily valued by his career; therefore, the idea that lighter complexions allow them to have more privileges or opportunities is appealing, especially in a competitive job market. Men may want to have an advantage over their co-workers because they want to improve their employment positions and their social economic statuses, even if it means being exposed to hazardous toxins. I believe that Indian men’s perception of skin color is predominantly affected by hegemonic Western imagery and media. In all reality, Western corporations do not want to adopt the beliefs of others but merely want to sell them their products. Western corporations influence and control consumer trends by inexplicitly stating that “light-skinned men are more intelligent and martial as opposed to darker-skinned men who lack intelligence and masculinity”. Thus, globalization does have a direct impact on Indian men by altering their self-perceptions and making them believe that “white is better” or in this case, “light is better”.

Week 7, Module 3 Assignment 1: Skin Lightening Debate 1 (Indian Men)

Debate #1: Skin Lightening for Indian Men (Racism or Realism?)

In 2010, Vaseline launched a skin lightening cream for Indian men that promised "Visible fairness in just two weeks." As we learned in lecture and Evelyn Nakano Glenn's reading, the origins of colorism in India are obscure and may be traced as far back to the migrations of Aryans into India during the Vedic period. Furthermore, they are certainly linked to an associated of darker skin with labor and lighter skin with the types of intellectual and/or domestic labor associated with higher castes within ancient caste order in the Vedic system. Nevertheless, as Nakano Glenn demonstrates, it was during the era of British rule (roughly 1757-1947) that colorism was consolidated and institutionalized and fair skin was turned into a structural privilege. After the fall of the British Empire, the social stigma of darker skin still remained, but more so for women rather than men, since women often few means than marriage to determine social position.

So then why are Indian men now emerging as a market for skin lightening cream in the era of economic liberalization in India under globalization? Do you believe this is the cynical manipulation of racist ideologies by multinational corporations like Unilever (the corporation that owns Vaseline, and that by the way is responsible for some of the racist colonial soap ads we studied from the 19th century) OR is it simply an an acknowledgement of an aesthetic preference in a globalized world dominated by Western media and in which socially mobile Indian men are going to have to move?

Click here to read more about Vaseline's Indian Skin Lightening App for Men

Then read some of the reader comments on the following:
http://jezebel.com/5585906/vaseline-crowdsources-racism-with-new-skin+whitening-app
http://blog.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/16/facebook_apps_gone_rogue

Week 7, Module 3 Assignment 1: Skin Lightening Debate #2 (Skin Bleaching in Jamaica)

In "Yearning for Lightness: Transnational Circuits in the Marketing and Consumption of Skin Lighteners," Nakano Glenn argues that "colorism is just one of the negative inheritances of European colonialism. As we studied in lecture by looking at 19th-c. soap advertisements, "European colonists... associate[d] Blackness with primitiveness, lack of civilization, unrestrained sexuality, pollution, and dirt" (167). In the slave societies of the colonial Caribbean, colonialists used detailed gradations of skin color to divide and control populations of African and mixed-race slaves, free peoples, indentured servants, Creoles, and Europeans. The institutionalization of racialism into the everday life of colonial society, as a method of rule as well as the signposts of seemingly mundane social relations, had broad and deep implications. As the famous postcolonial thinker, Frantz Fanon argued (speaking of the experience of living under French rule on the island of Martinique), "cultural values are internalized, or 'epidermalized' into consciousness, creating a fundamental disjuncture between the black man's consciousness and his body" (Deepika Bahri).

Nakano Glenn discusses in detail the use of skin lighteners in contemporary Africa today. Some of the same dynamics are at play in the contemporary Caribbean. Watch the following video and then comment on the questions below:

1) Nakano Glenn argues that in the African contexts, the use of skin lighteners has been increasing among "modernized and cosmopolitan African women" (169). Which groups does this film argue are the primary consumers for skin lightening creams? Why do you think modern and cosmopolitan young people are emerging as the primary consumers for skin lightening creams in this globalized era? Reread p. 169 before offering your thoughts. 

2) The comments from youtube users seems to emphasize the need for "self love" as a corrective to the "skin bleaching epidemic." Do you agree that teaching a discourse of self love is the answer or is this a more entrenched problematic that needs a more complicated solution on a number of fronts? What fronts would those be and would might some of these solutions look like?

Response to Group 3's Project Blog

The women whose lives were documented in the film Maquilapolis and numerous other maquila workers are mere cogs or minor instruments of labor within the large organizations of US owned corporations. The women were and still are considered just that, cheap labor. They were rarely appreciated or valued for their modest work but instead were monitored, belittled, and harassed. Moreover, the maquila workers did not have stable jobs because they could easily be replaced by others, predominantly women, in Mexico who sought sources of income to help support their families. For this reason maquila workers were not able to express their earnest feelings about their job assignments or work environments. They either dealt with the situation and current conditions or were unemployed. The maquiladoras required much toil and effort on behalf of the women, which often led to overtime or prolonged work hours. As mentioned in Gendered Violence: Murder in the Maquiladoras, women near the town of Juarez, Chihuahua would end their shifts late at night and it is then that they would disappear.  As they headed home after work or to bars to alleviate some stress, “many young women and girls would be attacked, raped, and frequently murdered”; but, why were these girls the main targets or victims within maquiladora cities? Femicide frequently occurred within the city of Juarez due to the sexualization of women within maquiladoras and the many misconceptions that people had about them. Women within these border cities tried to make a living but in doing so were forced to sexually please their managers or supervisors and form relationships with them, causing others to view and act negatively towards them.

Bottom-Up Strategies in Chicken Feathers and Garlic Skins

The Nightmare Ends, for Now… (pages 55-56) (Elizabeth Martinez)

            Chun Yu and her friends decided to no longer tolerate Mirage Factory’s negligence towards health, sanitation, and the law, but stand up for their rights. Rather than keeping their silence, they tried fighting for justice by filing a labor claim against the company. They sought rightful compensation for the long arduous hours they worked but were not paid for. Although labor officials were corrupt, Chun Yu and other workers remained united, were persistent, and eager to resist the many inequalities factory workers confronted.

l

Tiger Hong (Pages 147-148) (Ashley Marston)

      A woman named Yu Wei Hong told Chun Yu Wang of her experiences of transferring from Michigan factory to Sam Kwang factory.  She stated that she was given the option to live either in the barracks or outside for a fee to the big monitor and the director. Hong wanted to live outside, did not wish to pay the fee, so she wrote a letter to the office. They did not care and to punish her for rising up, they deducted a sufficient amount from her pay check. In response, she began to gather evidence to take them to court. Another girl in the same situation filed a complaint with the Federal Ombudsman's Office. Sam Kwang found   this out and became scared of an uprising, so they met her demands. The woman spread the word of her victory against the factories wishes and confrontation broke out between her and the big monitor. The woman stated, "At Sam Kwang, you are Big Monitor, but when you walk outside the door, you are nothing". Hong and this woman stood up to the factories and demanded their rights in a proper and legal way. These two, strong women stood up to the man and told them that they had just the same legal rights that factory heads did. In my opinion, they set an example for the quieter ones who just did as they were told, like Chun Yu Wang, and opened the doors for the masses to have a say in the system. The bottom up strategy is something I feel is very important to keep the system fair and just.

___________________________________________________________________________

Atu. (Like an Egg Hitting a Rock) pg.33- Lina Norena

I would like to identify an example of an ineffective bottom-up strategy which can be found in many chapters of the book as Chun Yu moved from factory to factory.  In this particular passage, she tells the story of a heated argument she fell into with one of her "big monitors" named Atu.  She describes how many of the big monitors would get paid off by the workers to make their lives "easier" in the factories.  Chun Yu was one of the few that would not succumb to this.  She describes an altercation between her and Atu where Atu was asking her to do the work of one of the other factory workers who had paid her off.  "...$500 to make her life easy.  That meant someone else's life would get harder.  That someone was me." (Wang 33)  Chun Yu refused to do as she was told and this made Atu angry, resulting in a fight between the two.  We see these type of injustices in all industries today where there is favoritism among the supervisors and other workers or platonic friendships that create a gap between them other workers of the same ranking.  Although Chun Yu was standing up for herself and what she thought was right, this argument was not the most effective way to deal with this situation.  Unfortunately, her situation might have been a lost cause even if she approached someone in upper management because of the nature of the factory.  The above blog post I think exemplifies a better way of dealing with injustices in a work place although it can be dangerous.  Throughout history we've learned about the fear of an uprising in minorities and this in turn causes adjustments to be made within the system to prevent that feared uprising.  Real changes have been made throughout history in fear of slave uprisings  and minority uprisings and although it may not be the best solution or the definite solution to the issue, it's definitely better than singling yourself out to someone who has power over your job.

 

_______________________________________________________________________________

  

Looking for bones in an Egg - Pages 133 - 135 (Jill Shah)

One of the bottom-up strategy that Chun Yu used, in order to escape the insults and scolding of her line monitor Ying, was by fighting back to her and not accepting the things the way they were and living life along.  When Ying accused Chun Yu of lying about the number of pieces she had worked on, she could not take it. Instead of putting up with whatever false accusation the monitor blamed her for, she decided to prove herself and fight back. She told her that if she wanted to she could go back and count them herself and then add them up to see it was right. Further more she said, "If I do something wrong, I will accept criticism. If I am right, you have to give me respect". This shows how much courage Chun Yu had in herself and how she wasn't afraid of the "powers" of the monitor. For her, what was wrong - was wrong. After Ying realized that she had made a mistake by getting into a fight with Chun Yu and that Chun Yu was not one of the weak women, she denied the fact that she was addressing her in the first place. When Chun Yu heard her say this, she got even more furious and asked her who was she talking to if not her as she was looking right at her. Instead of thinking of letting the argument go since Ying denied her talking to Chun Yu, Chun Yu decided to challenge her and not let her get away with it.  At first, the other girls were asking her to stop fighting with the monitor but in the end they all realized how righteous it was for Chun Yu to fight for what was right. She set a very heroic example for others to follow. 

Another time, Chun Yu had to work on two machines at the same time and hence the pile of her clothes was very high. When Ying saw this, she asked her why she wasn't doing her work properly and why was she so slow. Chun Yu got very angry as she felt like Ying was accusing her of playing around and not working. She started screaming at Ying and Ying started crying. When the Big monitor interpreted, Chun Yu told her off too. The big monitor got very angry and told her to keep quiet or she would be sent home. To this, Chun Yu said, "No work? No problem!" and their argument continued. This shows us how Chun Yu did not get threatened by the threat the big monitor gave her and continued to fight back for what was right. She had realized that her work was very important for them and so she should be given respect as well. Here, Chun Yu illustrates that one should always fight for what is right and never put up with what is wrong.