New Year, New Thoughts

Happy New Year 2011! How strange it is to be in 2011 already. I still remember clearly the turning of the century, with the Y2K scare and everything. The entire United States has become completely paralyzed by astounding amounts of snow, except for the state of Florida. That means even Hawaii got snow! Georgia was pretty much paralyzed for four days by several inches of ice, spreading across the city. I personally did not fall on the ice, but I've heard a number of humorous stories of people who have fallen, victim to the ice. Having lived in Georgia for eleven years, I must say that this is the strangest and unfamiliar weather I've ever seen, and convinced that climate change is more prominent than it has ever been. But this is normal, for the Earth goes through its cycles, with or without our help. Nature will do anything to stay stable anyways, so we can only expect it to wipe us out completely if we mess around with it too much.

However, this post is not a vent on climate change and the sad excuse of the human species, but rather a post on some interesting articles I came across yesterday at the archives. For clarification, I have been working at the Atlanta Housing Authority as an archivist of public housing documents. The position is well paid, and we benefit from working for a government organization, who likes to take a good amount of vacations. We've moved onto the second series of the archiving project where the newly appointed Chief Executive Renee Glover moved away from the traditional public housing format and moved towards mixed-income communities, where people of different income levels would be able to live together in privately owned apartment complexes. I found two major points in the articles and letter I read in the boxes I was archiving that really re-enforced my distaste for the AHA, despite the rather large paycheck I receive from them.

The first concern I had was the approach that Renee Glover took to deciding who would be approved to move back into mixed-income communities after their homes at the projects had been completely razed down. Residents were either able to apply or submit a ticket to a lottery for a home. Selection was very harsh and almost unfair, to the point were only about sixty families were allowed to move back into Centennial Place once the Techwood/Clark Howell homes had been torn down, which had housed hundreds of families. I feel a certain rage for people who are forced out of their homes for the sake of city appearance and privatized residential space, and even more when so few of them are allowed back to their homes. The rest were either then left at the mercy of the AHA to approve them for a Section 8 voucher, move into another blighted project, or even the boot and left to make it on their own. I cannot put into words how enraged I am at this government who continues to push policies that dehumanize the disadvantaged. It seems to me that those who depend on government aid are constantly trampled on and have no say in their life course. If you live in a government funded project, you are constantly at the mercy of policy makers to not tear your life apart because you don't have the money to make it on your own.

This problem, however, is not a question of dehumanization of residents, but dehumanization of people. People who end up in public housing generally are there because of the lack of respect they receive from the general population. People who are poor, elderly, disabled, or otherwise not able to provide for themselves are viewed as some sort of virus in society, and Atlanta is on a mission to remove the plague from the public view. Schools in disadvantaged neighborhoods are poorly funded and often the hurdle that new teachers must jump before they are promoted to nicer suburban schools. I used to volunteer for an elementary school in south Atlanta, were we would sit with the children and help them as they poured over math and reading worksheets. One Saturday Hands on Atlanta took us and the children to the Atlanta Botanical Gardens, where I spent the majority of the time running around with these two adorable little girls, one who was Black and one Hispanic. I took them to go see the orchids and we walked together through the jungle and desert exhibitions. We sang songs on the way home in the bus and make goofy faces at the cars that passed by. As we approached the school, the girls started to talk about boys and what their ideal boyfriends would be like, and I was heartbroken by the nine-year-old Hispanic girl who said "I want a boyfriend who won't leave me if I have a baby." I told her she didn't need to have a baby if she didn't want to, and she could go to school instead and do anything she wanted, though I felt like I was lying through my teeth.

Lack of education, especially in this country, is a prescription for poverty. With high school degrees almost meaningless and Bachelors degrees heading for the same fate, a chance for a decent career is becoming a chance that the financially advantaged are entitled to, with a few less advantage slipping through the cracks. This brings me to my second point of thought: the importance of education, and how we perpetual poverty by not giving help to those who need it most. One of the article mentioned that a woman of 34-years-old with fifteen (fifteen!) children was not approved for a home in the newly constructed Centennial Place. There was a little clipping stapled to the article of a woman who was raging mad that her taxes were going to help a family of one mother raising fifteen children, and this disturbed me so much as I at the point of laughter. I'm curious to find if that woman would have also opposed sending her taxes to other, underfunded school districts, or to fund a "safe-sex" sexual education curriculum. Perhaps if this young woman had been giving a stimulating, vigorous education that pushed her to college, and a sexual education program that had taught her to put on a condom, she wouldn't be stuck in projects with so many children and a pitiful welfare check.

I also read a letter of a man who had served in Vietnam and had had both of his legs blown off in combat. After being on the streets, homeless for five years, he finally manage to pull himself out of homelessness and find a small apartment in the East Lake Meadows (I believe). I found a three page letter, front and back, written by hand to the AHA, begging for release from prison and the right to return to his home. I don't know if this guy was telling the whole truth, but he seemed pretty torn apart that he was back in misery.

I just can't fathom the point of such dehumanization, and how people can live solely responsible for themselves. No one has the sense of community and compassion. I see this over and over again as the world continues to eat itself from the inside out. So here to my New Year's resolutions: Compassion and Love!

My Conflict with Dahrendorf.. with the little help from my friends

This is my attempt to post as sociological and intellectual of a post as possible. I guess by writing that I have already ruined the intellectual part, but nonetheless I feel this is important, significant, and urgent! Therefor there must be a post.
In Social Theory we are learning about Conflict Theory, and we focused particularly on a guy named Dahrendorf and his theory of group conflict, that focuses largely on conflict between and within groups, but also the unequal distribution of power. He believed that conflict was inherit and a basis to social life, and conflicts should be regulated rather than abolished. This is the notion that out of conflict comes social advancements and justice for groups that are otherwise marginalized.
For this I would like to take the example of the Civil Rights Movement. The conflict was created between the Blacks and Whites (I'm making this very broad, yes I know) that did not see eye to eye on treatment in society of Blacks. So MLK and the gang pretty much created conflict until the problem was addressed and laws were changed to (attempt to) resolve the problem of racial inequality. We're not there yet, but its coming along... sort of. How I see the situation was that MLK was trying, in fact, to reduce the conflict by creating agreement and overall social change in mentality. I understand Dahrendorf's perspective when he says that conflict must not be abolished, yet I also think that our of conflict comes the abolishment of conflict. Marx presented the idea of unification among the proliteriats to dismantle the bourgoiesie, and from there the people would all live unifed and in peace. So I believe that with the right type of conflict, like the civil rights activists fighting and continuing their opposition to racial inequality, the racial conflict will eventually die off. So the abolishment of conflict must neither be regulated nor abolished, because then it will give the issues that have enough momentum and meaning a chance for justice.
Second, I don't buy the whole notion that we are all inheritly different groups. I believe there was a time, long before we cared about aquiring land, power, women, money, whatever, that we eithera a) cared about our well-being as humans, regardless of appearance or b) we didn't care at all, so we left each other alone. Although the latter is more probable, I do believe there was a time in our history where we simply did not see difference in appearance and anything more than a superficial characteristic, if even that. I believe that we were made to see race and ethnicity by those who were in power and got in fights with each other. Now we've made it some sort of reality that we must both uphold and deconstruct. And we're all divided by it. So I don't think that groups, by nature, conflict with each other, but rather they've been socialized to do so.
So... all in all, Marx still wins. Its not about groups, its about those in power and taking them down. We must all unite, embrace our socialized differences, and fight the man!

I am no longer a Democrat!

These recent Senate electoral races have me so annoyed I don't even know how to explain how I feel. I grabbed a copy of the New York Times this morning, for several reasons. first, the school is handing them out for free, so why not? Second, it makes me look very socially privileged and very much like an intellectual to sit in a coffee shop with my tea and reading the New York Times, not once glancing up at the television blaring "The View." Third, print journalism is dying and I feel like I need to read up on paper as much as I can before it all dies out. To take it a sociological step farther, the function of my newspaper reading had the latent function of a very attractive, bearded young man and I exchanging a quick but suggestive glance at each other. Functional latent functions are often the most exciting.
But back to the topic! I was reading the article Election Likely to Increase Political Divide Over How to Solve Federal Deficit, where the current Republican and Democrat divide over economical policies were briefly explained and heavily criticized (yet another theme of modern American journalism). There are two problems with the bipartisan system, the two being that Republicans and Democrats just do not have any desire or knowledge as to how to work together among their differences. Second, the Democrats have become a bunch of divided wimps, and they are relying only on their majority to get anything done.
Republicans and Democrats have always had different motivations in Congress and in politics in general. However, we live in an age where there are too many social groups and even more social issues for our country to survive through a bi-party system. Republicans now have their hands too deep in corporate pockets, and their minds too stuck in pre-historic notions of organized religion to make any sort of concise, rational, responsible political decision. Democrats, on the other hand, also have their hands too deep in corporate pocket, but won't own it. Unlike the Republicans who can make strong claims against abortion, Democrats do not scream and yell enough about the lack of individual freedoms. Republicans are appealing to the public as the family-party, whereas Democrats (bless them) are coming off as political radicals, and no one in America likes a radical. That's just how that boat floats. And the two have no incentive or desire to work together to make the majority of Americans (who are moderates anyways) happy. The great divide of Republicans and Democrats is only a facade, folks. Don't buy a word of it.
Second, I'm reading here that "Democrats differ among themselves on whether to extend all the Bush tax cuts... or just those for households with annual incomes below $250,000" (pg. A18). Great, so now even the team with no backbone can't even figure out if they want legs or a back. Either way, most Democrats, along with economists, agree that "with unemployment stuck at nearly 10 percent, more stimulus spending is needed" (pg. A18), so pretty much lets hand out checks of money our government doesn't have, so we can spend the money we should be saving to pay off all the money we've already spent but don't have, so that later our grandkids can pay off that debt. All in the meantime, we won't have healthcare or Social Security. I hope everyone in my age range has started saving up for retirement, because Social Security is going to become a thing of the past.
I love America, but sometimes I just wonder how much of the majority is going to have to suffer, and how much of ourselves we are going to have to eat before we start really get some chagne going.

The End of an Era

The age of Facebook for me has come to an end. What was first intended to be just one of many mediums of communications with friends has turned into the only medium. My mind was subconsciously creating statuses based on little details that I noticed, or insignificant details about my life. Critical communications to friends no longer took place over the phone, or (gasp!) in person. Friendships were kindled over wall posts and "likes" rather than in real human contact. No longer did I hear the voices or see the faces, but my friendships were mediated through the vast meaninglessness of the internet. Photographs were posted to prove how social and knowledgeable I was, that I went to parties, that I had the luxury to travel, etc. What I was a person was reduced to a few lines on my "About Me" space, with a few lines on my favorite pastimes and musics. Based on a few clicks, people were able to (so they think) get a sense of who I was. I had let who I was be reduced to just a few links and a few words on a single page.
But my greatest motivation to deleting was my interactions with people. Facebook creates friendships as conveniences, rather than obligations. It becomes easier to tell someone you miss them or hope to see them soon over wall posts rather than actually picking up the phone, actually seeing them. I no longer had to go through the painful stage of figuring out through conversation whether men I liked had girlfriends or not. It was already presented to me. Although it was nice to not have to go through such humiliation, it created distance between people I wanted to know in general. Facebook chat became a socially acceptable medium for asking people out on dates. No one called me anymore, but would just post important things on my wall, or send me a message. Facebook just made relationships with hundreds of people convenient for me all the time, when it really didn't do me any good to know hundreds of people. i was not made a better person because I was in the know about so many people's personal lives. In fact, I believe that I am better off now as an interacting human by keeping in touch to the people who really matter. I also deleted the account for privacy reasons, but I feel that the interaction principal is the most important.
So, if you have a Facebook and you find that you are as dissatisfied with your interactions as I was, think about deleting. You feel a sense of humanity and freedom. And you learn who your real friends are!

For another viewpoint on the anti-Facebook movement, I recommend this comical read:
http://www.progressivewebdesign.ca/hst.html

"Claire, you're different"

The title of this blog is taken directly from one of my fellows classmates after I pointed out that DeBois' theory couldn't work, because I was the only White person sitting on the "Black" side of the room, which DeBois argues we would have naturally segregated ourselves into, based on social expectations. I was, again, reminded of how much better I get along with the Black community than the White. Whenever I say this to myself, I always think that its so bad as a sociologist, to place people into such rigid expectations and norms. Essentially I am stereotyping.
Yet I still hold truth in this because the American Black community has a much stronger sense of family, friendship, and community than American Whites. Honesty is important, even if no one else agrees with you. The American Black community and the French have so much in common, its like a reminder of home. Is it bad for me to separate the two? Possibly. Is it bad for me to assume that all White people are shallow and individualist? Possibly.
Thus I turn your attention not to the Black community, but the White. Whites, we're really strange. I study our habits in class, I learn about our backwards acts in history, I put up with the slightly offensive/ignorant comments in class... but let me tell you we are a strange community. First, unless we are part of some church, Greek, or country club, we completely ignore each other. We don't talk to each other when we live in the same neighborhoods. Our children play indoors in fear of some stranger coming up and snatching them away, even though the likelihood of that happening isn't much. We have completely isolated ourselves from society because we have completely inheritated this label of the "bad White" but we also don't want to mix with others. We go to church almost as a facade, yet we don't actually internalize much from any life experiences. We are concerned with ourselves and not much else.
But lets not get all upset and give up yet. Whites, we have the power, just like everyone, to be more than "that White guy/chick." A professor of mine noted that the majority (yep, thats us) are all for charity, but not so much for social justice. Why is that? Why do we continue to segragate ourselves? Yes, we can always say that the other teams are doing the same, but have we really stepped out and given anyone a sense of acceptance? Do we try too hard to falsely see similarities when we could just embrace our differences? DuBois talks about this notion of the color line, and how life chances are shapes by social outcomes of race. I'm not trying to make this a competely race-only discussion, as I realize that class and gender are also huge determinants of outcome. However, we are a society that has a strong history of racial segragation and separation. But if I have to hear "I dont' understand why we can't just all forget about race and just get along?" one more time, I'm going to scream. Whites forced people into this land. And now these same people (but not all!) live in situations we would never put ourselves into. To quote my professor "If you're poor, you're likely to be White. But if you're Black, you're likely to be poor"
Why? Whats happened Whites? What are we doing to America? We are eating ourselves from within. We are creating abitrary lines that do nothing but foster fear and hate of each other. We are not encouraging nor pioneering social equality. We must look at ourselves and realize that people can be different or the same from us, but thats not what matters. What matters is that people get the respect and dignity they deserve. Not out of pity, but out of equality.
... just sayin'

Slight Conflict of Interest... maybe Robert can help...

So I have this dilemma that I have come across. Now this is me counting my eggs before I even buy the chicken, and I realize that, just as a disclaimer. So over the course of my college life, I have come to a conclusion that I am more concerned with living my life to the fullest, taking advantage of every opportunity I get to travel, study, learn, grow, etc. I had planned on staying in France for a while after graduation, to spend time with my family and to experience some new things.
So the plan was to be free of any sort of financial and work obligations between the months of January and August. However, I interviewed for this position as a research and archiving assistant with the Atlanta Housing Authority yesterday, and they are looking for a contractor of nine months, paid fifteen dollars an hour, twenty hours a week. Now generally I would not think twice between a good amount of money and traveling (traveling always wins), but in this case I am doing something that I actually would like to do. This is research in my field of interest, and I would be getting paid.
Granted, I haven't even been offered the position, so maybe I need to hold off on this rant, but I feel a conflict on picking over-seas opportunities to really cool, local research opportunities. Its like I'm choosing between money and travel.
If I were to stay here and do this project, it would be an excellent time for me to set money aside, get some awesome references and experience, be part of a archiving project that would allow researchers and policy makers to examine history to come up with new policy, and work for someone in my field of study outside of school. Also, I can only hold myself back from so much with my parents overseas. These are the kinds of choices that kids who live alone have to face, and as we grow, decisions have to be made between family and future.
However, I was really looking forward to getting out of Atlanta and going to France for a while. I was toying with the idea of going around to the United Kingdom for a week or two, hoping between Scotland, Ireland, and Great Britain. I wanted to see my family and spend time with them even if it was just for two or three weeks. I wanted to get out and see what kind of opportunities I could build for myself in Europe.
All this will be settled by next Monday, which is very soon. Perhaps a conversation with the parents, potential-future employers, and a few close friends will be required. Considerations of what would happen to the cats, the car, etc. Or maybe I should just wait to see if I even get the job, and then go from there!

Holy Moly Canolli its been ages...

My dearest blog, oh how I have neglected you! Granted, I don't do it intentionally, but rather my life is consumed with school, work, and the new member of the family: GRE! We're all very excited. about 2 months early but kicking like a tyrant! But for real for real, I think I'm going to be okay. Really nervous and all but I have no other option but to study like hell and take it like a boss.
So I've started applying to other schools, and I've pretty much narrowed my list down to Indiana, Georgia State, Penn State, UNC Chapel Hill, and SUNY at Albany. Really hoping to get into Penn State or Albany, since both offer full four year tuition/stipends... we'll see! I've really narrowed down my concentration to urban sociology, focusing on the psychological and physical well-being of people. The project on sexual risk in Kenya is really starting, and I'm super cereal about the whole project, and super excited! Granted, I won't be published for a long long time (if I even get there), but it would sure-as-hell be awesome!
Sometimes, when I look at the data, I get frustrated because they don't survey every country the same, and I'm sure there are politics that don't enable the researchers to go in there and so what they want to do. When I was looking at the data for India on values of healthy sexual habits transcended to parents to children, they didn't even have a data set for it! But Kenya and Ghana both did... frustrations in a modern society. I haven't yet decided if I want to look at sexual behavior and its outcomes on younger generations, or if I want to looking at urban housing projects and slums throughout the world. Either way, its going to be full of danger, thrill, and adventure. I figure it might be a really long time before I can actually venture out into the field and collect my own qualitative data, but hopefully when that day comes I'll be more or less ready. Just the idea of going to slums in India or Kenya make me shiver... but somehow I will overcome this, for my love for research lies far within.
I've started seriously saving up money too. Ever since we've discussed Marxism in class, I've abandoned all desire to become anything but a researcher and professor. Its like some non-religious enlightment, where the brain gods have twisted my mind into thinking about whats really important. Its amazing how easy it is to stop spending so much money. I make pretty much all my meals and haven't bought anything unnecessary in a few weeks. Also, I'm trying to buy locally grown foods, or organic. I'm afraid I might be turning into one of "them" but its actually not too bad. Maybe I'll also get a small dog... later in life. But most likely I'll go to the shelter for a puppy and come out with four kittens. I mean, as long as I can get around, dress myself and eat properly, and have my cats, I really don't need anything else in life but some spare cash for plane tickets back home. I'll get my job and grants to pay for the rest of my travels... muahahahahhaha!
Well, I had to write a post, even though its sort of random. I have about 15 posts that I had started but I never got around to finishing and posting... I might go and revisit one of them tonight.