# data[].attributes.body
Aside from fulfilling my requirements for transferring out of delta, I am taking this class to aid my path in becoming a lawyer. I have an interest for understanding the structure of society and how the behaviors of social groups are manifested. With a more refined knowledge of various social groups, I believe that it will allow me to better understand my clients and how to defend them in the court of law. Additionally, this knowledge can help me become more empathetic and patient with people. I feel that I would be less judgmental if I was aware of how social categorization affects people's decisions.

# data[].attributes.body
On page 9 of the Heislin book, there was a specific line that stood out to me. It read, "A generation ago such feats existed only in the minds of "mad scientists", who at the time were irrelevant to the public but whose ideas today are still producing...." This idea is reminiscent of what I am learning in my political theory class regarding the Greek philosopher known as Socrates. In a metaphorical sense, Socrates was labeled as the "mad scientist" who challenged the governmental practices of Athens. As time progressed, the words and philosophies of Socrates are being taught today and have influenced an era of free thinking. Everyone is considered a "mad scientist" by the public when they introduce a controversial discovery or way of thinking.

# data[].attributes.body
This chapter made me self reflect on the commodities in my life, such as blue jeans for the sake of discussion, and how I ignorantly dismiss them as insignificant due to the culture that I am accustomed to. Blue jeans, in my eyes, are simply a piece of fashionable clothing; no more no less. However, I failed to realize that I am a component of consumer culture and a contributor towards the system of capitalism. I learned that jeans were originally intended for labor workers, who required a sturdy piece of clothing that will sustain themselves through constant wear and tear. It seems to me that fashion trends largely revolve around the idea that we should take unconventional clothing and make them stylish. Thus, a capitalist economy will thrive off marketable fashion trends. As long as there is a new, stylish fashion trend, there will be consumers ready to purchase the next best thing.

# data[].attributes.body
Upon reading this segment I  was immediately granted with a flurry of questions and ideas. For one, pg. 6-7 mentions the topic of culture shock, and how people should stay away from sociology if they are fearful of life-changing truths. This instantly made me think of "The Matrix" a film that involves the choice of taking a red pill or blue pill. The red pill will essentially "wake you up", or expose you to life-shattering truths that will dictate how you view the world from that point on. The blue pill, on the other hand, is ignorance. You will continue to live life in your own lane, blind to what is happening behind the scenes of everyday life. That is what I interpret sociology to be; sociologists have taken the red pill, while the majority of society has taken the blue pill.
I was also met with a few questions in response to this reading. Everyone with an occupation has the ability to live their lives as a normal person when they are not on the clock; but how does a sociologist live off the clock? How can a sociologist live their life free of analyzing groups of people and their behaviors? And more importantly, can that be debilitating to their relationships if they are in a constant state of analysis?

# data[].attributes.body
I can relate this reading to the psychology class I am taking. In this reading, there is a lot of information regarding social imagination, and how we use this to deliberate how society/environment impacts our behavior. This is similar to a term in psychology known as attribution; meaning to infer certain behaviors or events. In both cases, we are using these theories to understand other people's experiences and to form explanations based on society or surrounding environments.

# data[].attributes.body
The first thing I have ever purchased with my own money was a pair of Nike shoes for $180 dollars. I had just gotten my first job at this point, and was excited to feel the satisfaction of buying something nice for myself. The shoes were not practical nor functional; they were more for show and style, and I treated them as if getting them dirty was a crime. Was it a smart purchase? In hindsight, no.
I think that I primarily wanted them because they were in style, I loved the look, and I felt that I was obligated to treat myself after landing a job. Social pressures definitely influenced this decision, as I think the media programs you to think that acquiring money means that you have to look like you have money. Additionally, I could have bought any shoe; maybe something more functional like some ascics workout shoes. However, my sole focus was attempting to feel accepted into the working class, as if buying something nice was my initiation.

# data[].attributes.body
In the very beginning of the chapter, the key concepts page to be specific, I noticed that the reading mentioned Frozen Red Velvet Poptarts. I immediately thought to myself "Wow, that sounds amazing. I need to go try that when I'm done doing this assignment." As I continued reading, I realized that I was a victim of commodity fetishism. I put so little thought into how it was made, produced, and manufactured, and more into how delicious that snack sounds. I think we all fall victim to this when it comes to advertising, specifically fast food. When we see burger king advertise a new "10 nuggets for $2" deal, I presume that many of us are not thinking about the chicken. Aside from food, I see this a lot when it comes to Air Jordan shoes. We as a society are so fixated on the flashiness and popularity of the shoes, unaware of the cruel laborers that make these shoes without having shoes themselves. Also, the cost to manufacture these shoes is no more than 5% of the price they are sold for. Thanks to social imagination I regret buying Air Jordans.......

# data[].attributes.headline
 87-91: Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

# data[].attributes.subject
 87-91: Miner, Body Ritual Among the Nacirema

# data[].attributes.body
I have touched on the Nacirema in our class discussion, and I stated that some of the rituals were quite strange to me. For example, their rituals regarding the mouth, and stuffing it with hair and such. However, I can understand the reasoning and why they do it. It is a form of cleansing the mouth from negative energy, in which the mouth can produce hurtful words or negative ideas.
In my case, I am a Muslim, and some of our religious practices can be considered strange to others. For example, the hijab; a piece of cloth that Muslim women wear to practice modesty. While some may find it strange, there is a spiritual reason attached to the practice much like the Nacirema people.

# data[].attributes.headline
 109-117:  Hall & Hall, The Sounds of Silence

# data[].attributes.subject
 109-117:  Hall & Hall, The Sounds of Silence

# data[].attributes.body
This reading begins with the power of nonverbal communication. The idea that mutually understood gestures can be used to communicate certain ideas, as explained by Bob's head nod.  This reminded me of symbolic interactionism, where gestural communication is the focal point of this theory.  I can relate this to my culture, where in the Middle East we greet one another by kissing each other on the cheek as well as many other cultures. However, a majority of people in the U.S. may greet one another with a handshake.
In regards to silence, however, there is another thing that struck me in this reading; body language. I have noticed that gestures such as a crossing your arms may communicate that you are closed off and unapproachable. Having said nothing, you are subliminally showing that you are not interested in conversation. Silence is not so silent after all.

# data[].attributes.headline
 118-134:  Clark, Sympathy in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.subject
 118-134:  Clark, Sympathy in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.body
What I learned from this text was that sympathy is essentially learned, and is not embedded in us to perform correctly. I always believed it to be the inverse; that people are naturally sympathetic, and hostile environments can condition someone to lose that skill. I personally think I learned my ability to sympathize from my mother, who is a very compassionate person. Yet, there are many people that are inept at sympathizing. I have observed that many of those who have trouble sympathizing are those have overcome many obstacles, and have the mentality that "If I did it, you can to."

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 50 Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian perspectives                                                                  

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 50 Contrasting Marxist and Durkheimian perspectives                                                                  

# data[].attributes.body
For this entry I would like to not comment on a food that I eat, but rather a food that I don't eat in regards to my religion. Hopefully the same principle applies.
As a Muslim, our religion states that we are not to eat pork for health and cleanliness. This is something that makes me feel connected to my Muslim peers. However, pork is heavily fetishized in the form of bacon and ribs, a staple in many parts of the world. If the metaphorical curtains were pulled back, many will see how poorly pigs are treated prior to their demise. This is a reason why many people become vegetarian, as they sympathize with the mistreatment of animals. Since these practices are kept relatively silent and masked by advertisement, people will turn a blind-eye to this delicious food that we know as bacon.

# data[].attributes.headline
(JCB)  Appendix (401-424)  Advertising/Research methods

# data[].attributes.subject
(JCB)  Appendix (401-424)  Advertising/Research methods

# data[].attributes.body
Advertising plays a much larger role in my life than I had imagined; to the point where I almost consider it brainwashing. Reflecting on my perspective towards advertising, I feel much more inclined to buy an article of clothing from the nike store than target, despite the two stores being relatively similar in quality. Or, I feel much more satisfied purchasing the Coca Cola brand soda rather than the Shasta brand that you can find in Walmart. This gives me a great amount of insight as to how powerful consumer culture is, and how I as the consumer am so easily swayed by solid advertising and branding. This text also goes to show how the most influential and powerful people can promote something and make the popularity of said item skyrocket. For example, in the recent stock market fiasco, Elon Musk made 3-4 social media tweets about the cryptocurrency called DogeCoin. Following these tweets, the value of this cryptocurrency skyrocketed exponentially, despite this currency having absolutely no real value. People listen to those who are powerful; thus, these people that carry such a large influence can make almost anything popular due to their association with a brand or item. I must also point out that I am one of the people that invested in DogeCoin, despite knowing that it had zero intrinsic value. Regardless, I succumbed to the brilliant advertisement done by Elon Musk which persuaded me against my principles. This is one of the scariest things to me when it comes to branding; that an influencer or popular branding figure can even make harmful things popular, much like how the book discussed smoking. Smoking was initially "good for you", according to the public influencers at the time. It is mind-blowing how the leaders of consumer culture can manipulate branding/advertising to infiltrate the minds of their consumers.

# data[].attributes.headline
29-47: Henslin, Doing Sociological Research 

# data[].attributes.subject
29-47: Henslin, Doing Sociological Research 

# data[].attributes.body
In this reading, the text went into detail about symbolic interactionism, and how the meaning of certain symbols or acts can differ across cultures or situational context. More specifically, the book mentioned the example of a "push" warranting a more negative reaction than a "bump", despite the two actions being nearly identical in practice. I encountered a situation like this with my friend not too long ago; to provide some context, me and this friend have a relationship where we are comfortable play fighting and playfully annoying eachother with physical contact such as pushing or pulling. However, in one instance, I pushed on her forehead with my finger as a playful joke and she took extreme offense to that. The reason being, according to her, was that this action resembled a sign of disrespect and degradation in her culture. In practice, poking her forehead was no more extreme than our usual interactions; yet she had a completely alternate reaction to the specific place that I poked her and the meaning behind it. In my perspective, there was no meaning behind what my action; but I was quickly informed that her culture has a different constructed meaning for this action and what reactions I will receive as a result. This is quite interesting to me that two similar actions can perceived in an entirely different light based on context, situation, and culture.

# data[].attributes.headline
63-72: Pager, Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?

# data[].attributes.subject
63-72: Pager, Would You Hire an Ex-Convict?

# data[].attributes.body
The study showcased in this reading is quite telling as to how much racial disparity that we have in the U.S criminal justice system. A statistic that was alarming me to in this reading was that young black men have a 28% likelihood of being incarcerated. This insinuates to me that young black men are much more likely to be either indicted for a petty crime based on their race, or are more likely to be involved in illegal activity due to their environment. The environment that promotes these illegal behaviors, more so low income neighborhoods, could be indicative of a systemic problem in correlation with race. In regards to jobs, the numbers in the study suggest that employers were much more favorable to whites than blacks in a criminal and noncriminal setting. This particularly touched me because I have a black friend with a criminal history, and he struggled immensely to find a job and was fortunate to have a family help him out. However, I do not believe it should be this hard to turn your life around, especially for a young black man. I feel that criminal records are far too permanent and unforgiving, and my friend was almost an example of that if not for the family that helped him. Not all young black men are given these resources and guidance to work the justice system in their favor, and it becomes more of a problem when racism is brought into the picture.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 105 Coffee Shop Ethnography

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 105 Coffee Shop Ethnography

# data[].attributes.body
I went to a coffee shop in Stockton by the name of Empresso. What I initially noticed when visiting this coffee shop was the groups of people that I encountered. I noticed a lot of people with colored hair, piercings, tattoos, and cigarette smokers. What I derived from this observation this that this coffee shop is a safe space for people with unconventional styles. It seems to me that this coffee shop is a judgement-free zone and welcomes all types of people, making it more comfortable for different races, sexual orientations, personalities, and fashion styles. The coffee shop was friendly as a whole, but I observed that everyone was segregated into their own crowds; the college students were studying and socializing at one table, while the people with skateboards and forehead piercings were smoking cigarettes at another table. That's not to say that they were not friendly with eachother, or that these different groups were not fond of one another, but they were more comfortable with their own particular crowd. To summarize all these points, this coffee shop appeared to be a very progressive and liberal safe-space, that caters more towards a young generation of people that want to express themselves.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 10 Branding/The Self and Social Interaction  

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 10 Branding/The Self and Social Interaction  

# data[].attributes.body
I can definitely say that I have gravitated toward consumption for a sense of individuality. I used to be extremely materialistic in high school in order to be perceived as cool popular, trendy, etc... As I grew older, I eventually left this materialistic phase; however, I still consume and wear clothes/items to show my individuality. One thing I noticed on instagram is that there are thousands of clothing brands that are advertised in a way that promotes uniqueness or individuality. For example, a clothing company I saw on instagram was promoting some flamboyant outfits with a caption that read, "shop here and find you". In essence, they are perpetuating consumerism by encouraging the consumers to "find themselves."
A section of the text that resonated with me was the looking-glass self concept. The reason this spoke to me is because I can vividly recall how I experienced this phenomenon. In high school, I used to get a lot of compliments on my eyes. These compliments inflated my sense of self, causing me to neglect other aspects of myself such as humor or intelligence as the book mentioned. As a result, I would feel offended if someone did not acknowledge my eyes or use that as a basis to like me. The looking-glass self concept was particularly dangerous for me because it instilled a fragile sense of confidence that was based purely on my physical features.

# data[].attributes.headline
135-146: Goffman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.subject
135-146: Goffman, The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life

# data[].attributes.body
Right off the beginning of text I can already say that I immediately attempt to observe the characteristics of another person in the very moment they become present. I notice that I do this a lot with very attractive people or people that I admire; I like to see if they are humble or stuck-up. Humility in others allows me to better connect with people that have a high societal or financial status, as I am more comfortable knowing that their sense of self is not overly-inflated.
The text mentions that the self-presenter will always try to give off an impression that leads to others following in accordance with his/her plan. Based on this, I was met with a question; how can we as people effectively and realistically communicate if we are all trying to fulfill our personal agendas? In other words, how authentic are we being with one another if all our self-presentation is based on satisfying an agenda to get people to like us? This is important for me and how I communicate with people, as I feel that I misrepresent myself for to get people to respect me. I think that self-presentation based on incentive can be harmful for this reason.
In terms of communication, I can say with assurance that I lean more towards nonverbal communication to convey my self. I rely primarily on eye contact, body language, and posture to present myself in a confident and strong manner. I would say that my incentive in communication is to get people to respect me; thus, I prioritize my non verbal gestures as opposed to the specific content that I speak.

# data[].attributes.body
I would like to make a comparison between a show called "Black Mirror" and the previous post about the presentation of self. Black Mirror is a show about twisted psychological premises with an underlying message. One episode called "White Christmas" involves a dating coach that talks to an awkward young man through an earpiece to help him date women. A piece of advice the coach gave was to essentially inflate a person's ego to get them to like you. This is reminiscent of the reading to which the text says the self-presenter acts to fulfill their own agendas. Much like the tv show, the young man used a presentation tactic in hopes for the woman to date him. It makes me ponder how many people are being ingenuine with me in hopes for something in return.

# data[].attributes.headline
249-264: Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead

# data[].attributes.subject
249-264: Thompson, Handling the Stigma of Handling the Dead

# data[].attributes.body
When it comes to funeral directors morticians, I must I admit I do buy into the stigma of these individuals regarding their work. I view the work as morbid, cold, dark, and that those engage in this work are detached people. I ponder what kind of person it takes to take on a job such as this, to constantly be around death and not be heavily affected by it. However, this is where symbolic interactionism started to shift my perspective. When I hear the words "loss" or "sorrow" rather than "death" or "corpses", my stigmatized views of this work were altered. Again, as mentioned in pages 29-47, these phrases mean the same thing in theory. However, the variation in phrasing makes me view morticians as heroes rather than outcasts. This makes me wonder how symbolic definition has shaped my views on things that I would otherwise feel differently about. For example, the phrasing of weed and how it dictates my perspective on the drug. When one hears "marijuana", it is usually tied to illegal behavior, delinquents, lowlifes, or criminals. Conversely, when one hears the word "cannabis", I feel that people think about medicine, relaxation, or remedial. It goes to show how powerful symbolic definition is, and how morticians use it to their advantage to defeat the stigma regarding their work. If their occupation is presented in a friendly, empathetic, and communal sense, people are more likely to be receptive to it as opposed to hearing about death and corpses.

# data[].attributes.body
Recalling back to highschool, shopping was a pretty stressful and anxiety-inducing experience. Previous to going shopping, I was typically excited to purchase some new clothes, however I always ended up feeling overwhelmed. I think that a lot of this stemmed from a desire to impress other people, and to project my sense of self as someone that is cool and trendy. As a result, I would end being so stressed to find the perfect outfit that I would spiral in anxiety. Shopping as a high schooler always made me feel inauthentic because I was always looking to buy the coolest jordans to impress my peers, whilst standing in line with my mother because she was buying them for me. Needless to say I was a pawn in the vast world of consumer culture.
Fast-forward to the present day, I am a lot less materialistic and I only ever shop to buy something specific. If i need a pack of white t-shirts, I walk into the mall and walk straight out with my product. However, I still do enjoy shopping; I tend to go shopping for leisure when i'm on vacation or out with my friends. I now have zero anxiety when I shop because I have nobody to impress, which is I why I believe consumer culture relies heavily on trending styles among the young generation.

# data[].attributes.body
This reading was actually quite insightful. It made me ponder how many times Ignored my own morals and values just to be obedient to a superior. To elaborate, we as a society are taught to respect our parents under any circumstance. While this is surely a practice that is necessary and beneficial, it can cause harm if the parent is irresponsible or lacks a moral compass. We are also taught to obey the law; again, this obedience is necessary to regulate society and avoid chaos. However, it brings a question to my mind; what laws do we follow in the U.S could be considered immoral or distasteful in other parts of the world? For example, the death penalty is legal in some parts of the U.S, and by default we must obey these laws by simply being “law-abiding” citizens. However, other parts of the world may feel that the death penalty is completely immoral and unjust. It is intriguing to me that my entire life I was taught to be obedient and respect my superiors, but I did not think much of why I was doing it or what potential harm I could be doing. My parents are Muslim and raised me to be a Muslim, so I adopted and “obeyed” many of the written rules in the religion of Islam. In the present day, I still am a Muslim and I am completely aware of why I obey these rules. In hindsight, however, I went a majority of my life obeying rules that I did not fully understand. That makes uneasy because it shows how easily we can all be swayed by a corrupt ruler and turn a blind-eye.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 140  Shopping for "we-ness"

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 140  Shopping for "we-ness"

# data[].attributes.body
I can immediately recall an item I bought for a sense of belonging. It was two pairs of true religion jeans in the beginning of my sophomore year of high school. I specifically bought this brand because they were super trendy at the time, and most people that were "popular" or "tough" had these jeans. As a young boy just entering high school I did not get the attention from these crowds, thus I figured these jeans would start to gain me some respect. To my surprise, it actually worked; I got a lot more attention from the cool crowd as if the jeans were some sort of stamp. I ended up purchasing more jeans in order to maintain this new status.
However, this purchase did not satisfy my desire for belonging. What I realized towards the end of high school was that this was an artificial way of belonging, and I neglected the development of my character. Achieving a sense of belonging through material items is always temporary and will eventually leave you feeling empty in my experience. That is not to say that I no longer buy nice things, but I am much more responsible in my reasoning for buying my material items and how I carry myself.

# data[].attributes.body
One thing that I have always noticed when going to fast food places is that the employees always look miserable. Usually I would just attribute their negative attitudes to personal problems, financial issues or other exterior circumstances. This reading opened up a different perspective by highlighting the poor conditions and treatment of fast food workers. I would be miserable too if I had to work long hours with little pay, dirty working conditions and unsatisfactory protection. A lot of us, including myself, view fast food on a very surface level, being that is just an establishment where you pay a small price for food that comes out in 30 seconds. What I forget to realize is that fast food is apart of our consumer social structure, and that there are real people behind the hamburgers we order. In order to keep the prices low, and to profit those who are at the top of the capitalist chain, those people must be paid low wages, given little to no benefits, and work long hours. There are sacrifices to be made to keep a fast food chain operating smoothly, and at the expense of the employees; that is something that I feel I should keep in mind when dealing with these people.

# data[].attributes.body
I truly have never taken the time to thoroughly view life from the lens of a low wage worker or someone in poverty. That's not to say I have never thought about it, or that I am not grateful for my situation, but I have not fully envisioned myself in that type of financial situation. From the reading, it seems that low wage working is barely doable from a hypothetical standpoint, but with an extremely poor quality of living as a consequence. I imagine that the conditions that one must live in to survive on low wage are not particularly sanitary or enjoyable. I suppose that you must sacrifice some degree of comfortability when you are not making a considerable income, however I do not think that an individual should have to endure such poor circumstances to scrape by. Minimum wage is far from living in luxury, but I believe it should be enough to have a healthy sustaining life. I don't believe that I must eat fast food and live in a dirty home, regardless of the level of the job. However that is in a perfect world; we must have a lower class in order to have a higher class in a functioning economy. Nonetheless, I think all people that are willing to put the hours in should have some opportunity to live a healthy and enjoyable life to a certain degree.

# data[].attributes.headline
497-507: Leidner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.subject
497-507: Leidner, Over the Counter at McDonald's

# data[].attributes.body
This reading broke down just how important it is for big franchises to uphold their image. Through my lens, I walk into McDonalds and order a meal for $5 and walk out. However, like most things that I have learned in my sociology journey, there are much deeper waters. For example, how much effort that each McDonalds establishment puts into keeping the place clean and the protocol sanitary. I often forget how fragile a large franchise is and how much liability they carry, thus they must ensure that each establishment is running in top shape. We all hear the saying “one bad apple spoils the bunch”; that is essentially the same principle when it comes to a franchise like McDonalds. If one establishment serves raw food by mistake, the entire franchise is responsible for it.

It is quite interesting to me that the McDonalds franchise puts all their effort and technology to make each and every establishment identical in quality. All of their innovation is directed into making all their operations standardized in a more efficient manner. It is interesting when it is compared to other chains and businesses that innovate to introduce new additions and quirks, while McDonalds strives to stay stagnant. That opens a new perspective to me about how franchises are run as opposed to other businesses.

# data[].attributes.headline
535-546: Wishard, Caught Between the Ages

# data[].attributes.subject
535-546: Wishard, Caught Between the Ages

# data[].attributes.body
The reading mentioned something that was very eye-opening; that for the "first time in human history, the world is forging an awareness of our existence as a single entity." I interpreted this as the idea that we are finally working as a collective civilization in attempt to create sustaining lives for all human beings. This makes me think about the world before the prevalence of electronic media and satellite television. How aware were we regarding other countries and nations? How did people know what was going on in the world? How different were societies from one another as a result of the lack of knowledge from other parts of the world? These fundamental questions help me appreciate how developed the technology of our generation is and how I can see what's happening in Syria if I look on social media. I foresee a much more collaborative civilization with the prominence of American influence and the influx of new technology in the coming generations. However, that makes me fearful of losing diversity and culture if we are all accustomed to western influence. Will the world look entirely brainwashed 100 years from now, or more at peace and cohesive? Time will tell.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 79 Corporate Ideologies

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 79 Corporate Ideologies

# data[].attributes.body
A corporate brand that I have a connection to is the soda known as Coca-Cola. I think that this brand is an American staple that a lot of Americans including myself can identify with. There is something symbolic about the red can and cursive letters, and having one on a hot summer day at a barbecue. In regards to consumer habits, it could teach consumers that they spend their money on products that are typically unhealthy for them. Coca-Cola is not a particularly healthy beverage, but it thrives in business due to the prominence of the Coca-Cola brand. Consumers have gravitated towards the red can to the point where it is an American icon. Thus, Coca-Cola highlights that consumption habits are based on familiarity and symbolic connection rather than the quality or wellness of a product.

# data[].attributes.body
I would say that I am neutral in this topic because there are many pros and cons to the campaign. On the pro side, I am an advocate for a better quality of living for low wage workers. As I mentioned in my post on the Nickeled and Dimed reading, I believe that people should be able to live a somewhat healthy and sustainable life while working low wage, and not have to live in crime-infested neighborhoods and eat fast food to scrape by. On the contrary, I believe that $15 an hour for a fast food job will disincentivize people from striving for a better job. It will also generate conflict for other workers that may work jobs with more skill and physical effort, yet they are paid the same as someone who works at McDonald's. I think that a $15 hourly wage will encourage unionization of fast-food workers, but it also comes with the consequence of encouraging complacency. There will be no incentive to attain a better career if you can make a considerable living off of a fast-food job. Overall, I am an advocate for an increased minimum wage in theory, but it will generate conflict in the workforce at such a high wage increase.

# data[].attributes.body
I personally like coffee for the taste so I was slightly offended when Melissa said that it tasted bad. One thing I noticed in the beginning of the reading was that author introduced Melissa as a "white undergraduate student." Whether this was intentional or not, I have observed that coffee is an extremely common social staple in white female students. Although I am generalizing, you will almost always see a Starbucks cup in the hand of a white female college student. In terms of how this ties into consumption and its correlation with status, I think that coffee is somewhat of a social symbol for college girls and might influence people like Melissa to drink coffee, even though she doesn't like it. As the text mentioned, I also view coffee as a drink of high status and sophistication. I feel that it is common for two business people to discuss ideas over a cup of coffee, regardless of whether they enjoy it or not. There is some form of social symbolism around coffee that represents sophistication and high value. This could be indicative of why a lot of people drink coffee; to appear high value and important despite their economic or social status. This can be applied to all types of consumption, especially when it comes to clothes or cars. Many people will lease or buy cars that they can't afford to appear high value.

# data[].attributes.body
<-------------title for this post, did not want to edit timeline

# data[].attributes.body
The text mentions how poverty can have a positive impact towards a functioning society. At first glance with no context, this sounds outrageous and immoral as stated in the text. However, I recall an assignment n a previous sociology class to which I was instructed to identify how the different sociological theories would view poverty. I distinctly remember my responses for functionalist theory and conflict theory. For the structural functionalism theory, poverty is a benefit to society in a sense that people in poverty are serving their social function in society. This is similar to Merton's definition of the functions of poverty. In the scope of conflict theory, this perspective involves all groups of a society that compete for the utmost resources and status. Thus, poverty is an essential component to maintaining this theory as there needs to be a group at the bottom that is battling for resources. In essence, we need poverty in a functioning social system to create jobs and avoid economic stagnancy. If poverty were to be eliminated, we as Americans would be living in a communist-like economy. This makes me ponder if we intentionally perpetuate poverty to serve as a social function, or if it is naturally occurring due to the flow of the capitalist system.

# data[].attributes.body
<----------------title for this post

# data[].attributes.body
In the section of the reading titled "Learning What Feels Right", the text discusses how culture socializes the child and explains the effects of such socialization. I can confidently say that my success in school is largely attributed to the culture I was raised in. I was raised in a Middle-Eastern environment with a large surrounding community, to which everyone exchanges information and news to boost their status or ego. This created an immense pressure to overachieve and become the center of attention. There is also a heavy emphasis on education in my culture, which is what I take pride in to this day.  My parents sought to instill this mentality and culture in me since my childhood so that I could further manifest this into wealth. Along with that, my parents blessed me with a safe neighborhood and the proper resources to achieve my goals. I take this into account when interacting with other people that may have not had the same upbringing as me. I think its important to me that I am mindful of the socialization of others and how it can lead them to make bad decisions.
One perspective I would like to mention is that overbearing expectations from parents to a child can cause a counterintuitive effect on the child's success. I have met many friends who have extremely diligent parents when it comes to education, and while the parents have good intentions, it can socialize the child in a way that causes them to perform poorly and develop a low self-esteem.

# data[].attributes.body
The text has truly shed light on how the upper-class can navigate through life through a variance of institutions that keep them in their respective class. More importantly, how upper-class people raise their children to keep them separated from classes that are lower than them. In my opinion, this does not sound like a fulfilling way to raise your children. It sounds to me that upper-class parents are bordering their children from diversity, work ethic, and perspective. For example, the text hammers in on the idea of private/prep schools. For the most part, these schools lack cultural diversity. This appears to be a surefire way to make your children as privileged as possible, lacking perspective on the lives of other social groups. As a personal example, I see a massive difference between the individuals that went to a public school in comparison to a private school. While I will not name the school specifically, the private school was predominantly white and flooded with money. I have observed that these individuals were much more entitled and blinded from the lives of other social groups/minorities. This is the focal point of Higley's text; the upper-class is conditioned to stay in their respective class while making minimal contact with the lower classes. This way of living may be effective in creating generational wealth, It seems to be ineffective when instilling these individuals with humility, empathy, and open-mindedness.

# data[].attributes.body
This video was certainly eye-opening. The narrator of the video broke down the 3 different views of wealth distribution: Ideal, perceived, and reality. The perceived view, or what Americans think the wealth distribution is like in the U.S, is exactly what I imagined the wealth distribution to be like. There are those in poverty, a semi-struggling middle-class, and the rich/wealthy owning a large portion of the U.S wealth. However, I did not expect to learn that the 1% owned 40% of the nation's wealth. That is an absurd number, but then again it is believable considering that we live in a free-market system. As I have learned through studying the sociological theories, there must be a 1% and a poverty group to keep society functioning. As described in conflict, poverty is required to perpetuate the desire for the utmost resources and therefore encouraging people to work. There is also a need for that 1% so that those in the lower classes have a position to aspire to. With that being said, the wealth distribution in the U.S is quite excessively imbalanced. I do not believe that a group of a coupe million people should own almost half of the countries entire wealth. In terms of personal beliefs, I am far from a supporter of socialism in the U.S, but I think the "American Dream" is a skewed message considering the wealth inequality that we have.

# data[].attributes.body
When talking about race, especially in the context of sports, it becomes to difficult to the bridge the gap between social construct and biology. In regards to biology, there is nothing inherent that can possibly make one race better at a particular sport than another in the area of skill. However, on that same note, genetic variations in muscle type, bone density, hormones, and twitch fibers can be extremely advantageous in athletics. In the aspect of pure athletic ability, race no loner can be recognized as a social construct; there have been numerous studies that show African-Americans in particular that exhibit superior genetic traits in relation to athleticism.
However, we still see disproportionate success in the sports world based on race, such as African-Americans excelling in basketball/football and white people excelling golf or hockey. Personally, I would attribute this to culture. I believe that certain sports are prioritized in different cultures, which conditions that subset of people to naturally gravitate to that sport. I strongly believe the media is a large contributing factor to this, due to the fact that you mainly see black people in basketball advertisements and white people in golfing advertisements. Does athletic ability have a lot to do with success in sports? Absolutely. Yet there is no innate ability to succeed in a particular sport, but much rather a social conditioning to pursue that very sport depending on your culture and environment.
I would like to briefly touch on the concept of social capital in relation to sports, as mentioned on page 147 of JCB. Sports so much of a universal bonding agent that I can practically make a new friend or spark up a conversation with a stranger purely based on what team they root for. Contrarily, I also notice the opposite case, to which I created my own word for; destructive social capital. This is a situation in which people would resort to literal war over their beliefs on sports. As a little anecdote, at my job I had to separate two gentlemen from a physical altercation over a football dispute. This goes to show how powerful social traditions are, and how they can either form strong connections or destroy them.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 12: Music/Racism and Cultural Appropriation

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 12: Music/Racism and Cultural Appropriation

# data[].attributes.body
This chapter is extremely reminiscent of a dance appreciation class I took last semester. What I learned in that class is how black people in times of segregation and oppression was that music was a propelling factor in establishing community and belonging. This originated when black slaves were not allowed to engage in any activities besides their labor, which led to them creating music and forming dance routines. As the culture evolved, black dance was commoditized by suburban culture in the mass media to attract a wider audience. We see this a lot in today's world, where people create music about urban culture when they themselves have come from suburban culture. In essence, music was a very important cultivator of black culture during times of oppression. Even today, black music can be seen as both an art form and a underlying form of protest.
The text mentions the status of subculture on page 338, highlighting the aspects of music that become mainstream or cool. Relating back to the concept of black art being monopolized by mainstream labels, it is evident that rich and symbolic black art was heavily appropriated into simplified entertainment for the masses. Many of the origins of black art are not appreciated by the masses because of how mainstream labels deliver it, which typically consist of 2 minute songs that are gruesomely watered down versions of true culture. Overall, the dance appreciation class taught me a lot of black history that is extremely relevant in the sociology of music.

# data[].attributes.body
On page 362, the author mentions that their parents would say the phrase, "Don't be shown yo color". I often see this sad reality in the modern world, regardless of the progress we have made in racial equality. I once saw a video where a black woman with her natural afro was surrounded by her white coworkers in an office setting, while her coworkers continuously pet her hair as if she were an exotic animal. The woman that was being pet kept her composure and allowed the white coworkers to observe her hair as if she were a unicorn, rather than making a scene and standing up for herself. I believe the reason she kept her composure is because she did not want to give the media an image of black people being aggressive or ill-tempered. I think this is a very sad reality in which black people, especially in corporate settings where the employees are predominantly white, must act in a filtered way so that they do not "show their color". Had it been another race that was being physically harassed by their coworkers and they chose to act out, it would simply be seen as someone standing up for their integrity. However, the media is much more unforgiving when it comes to black people due to the ease of perpetuating negative stereotypes. That black woman, assuming that she defended herself, would be crucified and labeled a sensitive, erratic and aggressive individual. Another example I recently witnessed was an interview with one my favorite musical artists, Lil Baby. The interviewer asked the rapper why he does not have any tattoos, to which he responded, "I don't want white folks to view me as a thug and stop me from getting endorsement deals." Now, we can get to the issue of tattoos in general and how they have a negative connotation to them. However, I think that this comment holds a lot more weight coming from a black man because it shows his apprehension of appearing too "black" to rich white businessmen. It is quite unsettling that so many black people, even in professional workplaces, must filter themselves to appeal to white people.

# data[].attributes.body
What I gathered from this text is that racism is far from a distinct choice; but rather a feeling. The author of the text discusses how white racist act out of resentment, loneliness, and fear, insinuating that organized racism is a coping mechanism to feel important.
This is incredibly interesting to me. What comes to mind is how racism is far less prominent in today's younger generation as opposed to our grandpas and grandmas. You often see racial solidarity in social media coming from young people, who advocate strongly for defeating racism. What I am coming to realize is that this generation of young social justice advocators do not have a choice; and nor do racists. It is purely a perspective of life based on experiences, feelings, and ideas. The seniors of this generation that still believe in racism are non-curable, because it is not in their nature to stop being racist. That is how they view the world, and that's how they will continue to view the world. This is no different than me being physically incapable of racism, because that is not how I view the world regardless of what decisions I make. Am I defending or justifying racism? Not by any means. There are no excuses for racism and destructive ideologies. However, what is important to understand is that we cannot convince a racist generation to switch sides. We can only move forward and continue to advocate our stance on equality as the generation. That is generally what I gathered from this text.

# data[].attributes.body
I interviewed my mother, father, bestfriend, coworker and cousin. What I found in all of their answers was a commonality; tradition. Traditions as the underlying theme among each participant when it came to what they believe their race to be, how people view them, and how they know their race is distinct. For example, I will use my cousins answers for the sake of discussion. His answers are as follows:
1. I am middle eastern 2. I know because of what my parents taught me about my culture and origins 3. I learned this through experiencing my traditions in regards to food, music, and manners. 4. I decide other people's race based on skin color and their traditions. 5. People decide my race based on my appearance and expression of culture.
What is extremely intriguing about all of his answers is that skin color/genes was a very insignificant part of his response. Rather, it was the expression of culture and tradition that differentiated on race from another. With that being said, race seems to be a social construct in today's society. There are clearly subsets of people that can be identified by physical characteristics to determine race, such as African-Americans or Asians. However, I believe that behavior and traditions is a key factor when discussing race. You can have two people with identical physical features and white skin, but can be easily identified as either Italian or German based on the food they eat or the beliefs they carry. In the grand scheme of things, race by a technical definition is based on DNA in accordance to geography. Yet, we still classify people based on culture and traditions and that is evidently the case in all of the people I interviewed. Race by society's definition goes beyond physical and genetic characteristics; it is the expression of culture and traditions and how they vary from different subsets of people.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required Entry: How has your class affected your life choices?

# data[].attributes.subject
Required Entry: How has your class affected your life choices?

# data[].attributes.body
The way I interpreted this question was how this specific class has impacted my life so I will respond based on that. The biggest takeaway from this class was my ability to not only think more critically in social environments, but to be infinitely more understanding towards other people. I feel that I have a better grasp as to why people behave a certain way or make decisions that I don't particularly agree with. I have noticed myself sparking up a lot more conversations with strangers, and create meaningful dialogue to which I can have some sort of insight on their life. This class has given me an inclination to discover things about people, or different subsets of people, to invite perspective in my life that I was otherwise ignorant to.
I also have had personal awakenings as a result of this class. I have taken time to dig into my own culture, my sexuality, and race. The reason being, is I wanted to find out how the social groups that I was attached to has impacted my life and driven me to make certain decisions. What I found is that my culture has defined my charisma, and my skin color has shaped people's view of me (whether that be negative or positive). These observations have allowed me to tap in deeper to my culture and identify with it, in hopes of becoming more in tune with myself.
When it is all said and done, this class has changed my perspective entirely. Life is a machine; there are gears and screws that go into every part of civilization and society. I took it upon myself to deconstruct this machine and figure out how I can better interact with people using that knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
The earliest I can recall of when I was truly socialized into my gender was my experience in elementary school through high school regarding sports and “boyish” activities. Growing up I wasn’t particularly athletic and was the typical “nerdy” kid, which is not considered to be masculine or boyish. As I ventured through school I would constantly hear remarks that portrayed me to be girly or feminine, which although those are not negative qualities, as a male those remarks were not very endearing. All the boys would play basketball/football during recess, make fun of each other, and fight, and I was not as integrated into these “masculine” tendencies. As a result, I made an effort to inject myself into this masculine world by engaging in more sports, being more aggressive, and picking fights. This was one of the key defining moments of how I was socialized into my gender, because I felt that I had to be doing these things in order to be welcomed as a man. This concept is reminiscent of an earlier Padlet post I did called Becoming Male by Henslin, in which the post describes how boys have a hatred towards other boys that are considered to be sissies or not real boys. Essentially, I wanted to overcome that hatred by the becoming what society portrays as the ideal boy, consisting of the activities that I previously mentioned which are sports and locker room talk.
As this struggle bled into high school, where hormones and puberty came into the picture, a new battle arose; sexuality. I became even more socialized into my gender when the expectations of sexual characteristics and behaviors were more prevalent. For example, you are not a man if you are not sexually active, or if your muscles aren’t big enough. Consequently, that became the next milestone for me to strive for in order to feel welcomed as a man. Subconsciously, I was being socialized into my gender by the expectations of society.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 7: Toys/Gender, Sex and Sexuality

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 7: Toys/Gender, Sex and Sexuality

# data[].attributes.body
It is ironic when I recall the phrase, "real men wear pink" after learning that pink was initially socialized to be a boy color. I don't know if that knowledge completely invalidates the phrase or brings truth to it, but nonetheless it speaks to the idea that gender based concepts such as colors or toys are entirely social. There is nothing inherent that compels an individual to like trucks over princesses or vice versa, at least in the realm of gender/sex. I am quite indifferent when it comes to discussing the efficacy and morality of having gender based toys, colors, and actions. On one hand, I think that gender roles are absolutely necessary. By biological nature, men and women are born with different traits and I believe that we must accordingly to maintain a balanced society. It is only right to allow men and women to live to their strengths by encouraging behaviors based on their biological capabilities. If we do not encourage masculinity in men and femininity in women for the sake of ignoring gender roles, we could potentially be hindering the development of a man or woman into the potential person they could be. Contrarily, gender roles could be a hindrance to someone's potential if they wanted to defy them. What I mean by this is an individual could be destined to be an MMA fighter with their genes and physique, but chose an alternate path because they were raised with too much feminine energy. That's not to say women can't or aren't traditionally MMA fighters, but the traits found in fighters such as aggression and dominance are not typically feminine traits. Thus, enforcing strict gender roles could restrict an individual from pursuing something that they were made to do. Overall, I believe the pros of gender roles outweigh the cons. They are an integral part of our society and for the development of our children, whether or not it is a socialized concept.

# data[].attributes.body
Beauty, in a social and humanistic context, is one of the most obscure concepts that I struggle to grasp. What confuses me about beauty standards is how they can possibly be socially taught, when beauty is something that we as humans should naturally gravitate to. For example, the women's ideal body standard in the early 2000s were thin and white, which led to an epidemic of insecurity-induced anorexia. Now, women's beauty standards is more directed towards curvy and voluptuous body types, and tan skin. This has induced women to eat more and engage in workouts to maximize their curves, and applying mass amounts of makeup to appear tanner. Tattoos is also an intriguing concept, as they were found disgusting in previous times but are now the hot new trend for the concept of attractiveness. It is so puzzling yet so intriguing how beauty can be marketed, industrialized, and taught to people rather than it being an inherent trait in humans to recognize beauty as one static concept. I truly think any body type, skin color, and appearance can be made the new beauty standard with the power of modern marketing and consumerism. Beauty, as I've learned from observing the standards over the years and from this chapter, is a dynamic and forever evolving ideology that cannot be confined to a single appearance. What is "hot" and "sexy" will always be defined by those who run the fashion industry, beauty products and the mass media. It is not up to the individual as to what is beautiful and what is not, but more so what their contemporary environment tells them is beautiful.

# data[].attributes.body
I would like to begin this post by expressing my opinion on gender identity. Although the concept of masculinity, or gender identity in general is a taught idea from the day of birth, I believe gender identity is not entirely social. These norms have biological foundations, such as competitiveness in men as a result of our instinctive sexual response. Men by nature are competitive and aggressive beings, in constant battle to reach the top of the food chain. Thus, I think this has a lot to do with why boys have a hatred towards other boys who are viewed as sissies. I do not think this can be solely attributed to social teachings, but more of an instinctual response to boys who are not inherently competitive or tough. In regards to colors associated with gender, this has no meaning and is entirely bred from social teachings. However, when boys are encouraged to engage in tough and dirty sports such as football, I strongly believe that this is based on our natural biological traits.

The text mentions how the boys' world is superior to a girls' world. Now, my reaction to this was slightly confusing; is the author highlighting how boys have it easier than girls, or how boys have it harder because they're sexual journey is perceived as easy? Regardless, there is truth to the statement. I have a sister, and I have always lived a more free life than her. I was able to get away with more shenanigans, go out more, and act in a more vulgar manner as a child. As much as she loves me, she always envied how I lived a life free of restrictions. I recognize that these restrictions are based in good intentions, to make sure the girl grows up to be well mannered and feminine; however, I see it to be harmful to the young women and their development. I always felt a sense of guilt for being able to live so freely, and I did not care if I was held to a lower standard. We both grew up to be great people; but I can easily but not proudly say that she had a harder childhood then me in regards to freedom.

# data[].attributes.body
With the prominence of social media in this era, I think the emphasis of women's physical appearance has raised exponentially. A lot of women, or people in general, have developed an artificial sense of self as a result of social media likes/reactions. As the text mentions, this leads to women prioritizing their appearance rather than their character or personality development. However, social media has also birthed a new movement that focuses mainly on women; body positivity. We are starting to see all kinds of appearances and boy types being accepted and appreciated by the masses, as well as modeling agencies welcoming plus-size models. Whether or not this has an effect on the character development of women, it has definitely had a positive effect on the appreciation of all women and lessened the beauty standards to something realistic.

In regards to manners, women are absolutely held to a higher standard than men. Society expects women to be reserved, modest, quiet and submissive. I believe that there should behavior differences between men and women based on biological traits, but not to the point where people are being groomed to an exact standard of how they are believed to act. All people should live and express their sexuality how they desire, within respective reason. It is destructive to limit a woman to submission just because that is how society perceives them to act, and can hinder her character development if that is all a woman is taught.

# data[].attributes.headline
180-191: Thorne & Luria, Sexuality and Gender....

# data[].attributes.subject
180-191: Thorne & Luria, Sexuality and Gender....

# data[].attributes.body
It’s interesting to have some insight as to how young children are socialized from a sexual standpoint at the earliest stages of their youth. When we examine the behaviors of young boys, it is observed that boys prefer to be rule-breakers, run in large groups and use foul language. As a personal anecdote, I was first exposed to foul language and explicit sexual imagery at the age of just 9 years old. At the time, and even until this day, I viewed this as typical boyish behavior. I never truly understood that I was being somewhat “groomed” or socialized into what society views as a boy. Many of the traits that are found in young boys can be even translated into their adulthood, where men are still viewed as risk-takers and users of foul language. Women in the other hand, prefer intimacy and relationship networking. The text mentioned that young girls engage in this behavior, and it is evidently translated into adult practices. Take marital practices for example, the men have bachelor parties that involve vulgar and explicit behavior (showing risk-taking behavior and sexual vulgarity). Women on the other hand, have bridal showers, which are much more communal and intimate with regard to relationships. My question regarding this topic is as follows: how does socialization begin? As a young boy, I cannot recall being taught the behaviors that make me a boy, as I had learned them from my peers. So who taught them? Are gender scripts inherent, or do we gain this influence from a third party?

# data[].attributes.body
It is extremely eye-opening to see the differences in conversation rituals between the male and female sexes. To me, my responses to social situations are inherent and do not require thinking; in other words, I do not intentionally attempt to answer questions or use certain phrases in a masculine way. I definitely notice that women tend to apologize more, show more gratitude, and expect words of reassurance even when it is not necessary. Contrarily, I observe that men are a lot more oblivious to delivering words of reassurance, showing gratitude, and being cooperative. Again, as mentioned in my previous posts regarding sex, I believe that these concepts are once again derived from biology. Men tend to approach social situations more competitively and logically, while women are more emotional and willing to tranquilize conflict. When looking at biological traits found in the male and female sex, it is evident that men are inherently more competitive and eager to become the “top dog” while women are nurturing and willing to establish a sense of community for their offspring. As a personal anecdote, my sister confides in me about her personal problems to which she frequently follows up with, “sorry if I am bothering you or talking your ear off.” However, I have given her no signs that I am bored, bothered, or disinterested by the confirmation. Although there is no explicit reason for her to apologize to me, she insists on apologizing for the sake of considering my feelings and keeping the discussion on a communal ground. Contrarily, my male bestfriend has absolutely no issue talking my ear off for hours about something he is passionate about, even when I show evident signs that I am disinterested. It is interesting to me how conversational style and behavior is so distinct based on sex, which strengthens my belief that biology is a large contributing factor to these differences.

# data[].attributes.headline
341-348: Katz, The importance of being Beautiful

# data[].attributes.subject
341-348: Katz, The importance of being Beautiful

# data[].attributes.body
I have never taken the time to think about how I treat attractive people in comparison to unattractive people. While mentally I do not differ how I treat people based on their appearance, I wonder if I subconsciously treat people differently as such. One thing I can say is that my behavior towards attractive people is quite the contrary to what the text insinuates. I see myself being more kind to unattractive people, and more cold with attractive. I think I subconsciously view attractive people as stuck-up, self-absorbed, and snotty, which leads me to treating them as such. Conversely, I view unattractive people as humble and down-to-earth, to which I tend to develop more deep connections with conventionally unattractive people. I do however find it interesting how attractive people have the advantage even in school. It is interesting because I doubt teachers treat attractive students better because they are romantically interested in them or want something in return; which makes it all the more surprising that they would treat them with more respect. One time, I helped a girl move her car out of the street after it had broken down. Now, I would have helped anyone with such a task, but I can proudly say that I used it as an excuse to pursue the girl. In this case, I had an ulterior motive; contrary to teachers treating attractive students better when they have no reason to. This leads me to believe that attractive people gain the advantage purely because of the impression they deliver; that they are confident, likeable and sociable. It has little to do with romantic interest and more of how people perceive you, as the text mentions how unattractive people are perceived to be malicious and antisocial thus resulting in worse treatment.
This leads me to wonder how I am perceived, and if I am conventionally attractive enough to receive such treatment. Or, if I have ever received the treatment and am so privileged to the point where I don’t notice it. At least in my case, I tend to treat attractive people the same or even worse than unattractive people.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 207 Toy Store Observation

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 207 Toy Store Observation

# data[].attributes.body
I chose to visit toys r us. It was quite comedic how obvious the gender orientated toys were recognizable. For the boys section, it mainly consisted of trucks, mechanic tools, spaceships and superheroes. On the packaging for the superhero and spaceship toys, I observed that they had many illustrations of explosions and illuminated effects, resembling the aggressiveness that is commonly defined as a masculine trait by society. The tools and trucks, on the other hand, resembled potential jobs that men are most likely to engage in or are likely to be interested in, such as a mechanic or firefighter.
On the girls side, I observed princesses, castles, toy kitchens and baby dolls. This was particularly intriguing to me. It is interesting that babies are made as a toy for young girls, almost as if they are being conditioned to be good mothers from their childhood and embrace their biological traits of being motherly and nurturing. The princess toys embodies femininity, which consist of traits such as beauty, delicacy, manners and sophistication. What was slightly alarming to me was the kitchen toy, which didn’t quite sit right with me. I believe cooking to be not only a gender-neutral hobby, but a gender-neutral LIFE SKILL that is necessary to live a sustaining life. I don’t think it is appropriate to have a toy kitchen specifically designated to young girls as if that is what they are valued for.
Above all, an obvious sign that distinguishes the boy toys from the girl toys is the color. As one can imagine, the boy toys consisted of red, blue, and green colors, while the girl toys consisted of pink, purple, and creme colors. It is no secret that these colors are assigned to each respective gender by society, therefore it is reinforced in the toys made for young children.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 330 Counting Beauty

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 330 Counting Beauty

# data[].attributes.body
I looked up the website of one of my favorite fashion websites called boohooman. In terms of gender differences, they are about equal because there is a section for men models and a section for women models. What I did observe is that white people were the minority on this website. The majority of models were black, Latino, and Asian people, all consisting of tan and dark skin tones. The body types I observed were a large spectrum from skinny/low muscle mass people all the way to people that would be considered obese. On a side note, although this is not part of the prompt, I noticed a lot of tattoos on the models which really stood out to me. What I conclude from this analysis is that fashion is becoming increasingly progressive when it comes to appreciating different races and body types, when fashion was previously catered to white and thin people. I believe that the website intentionally made white people the minority in order to shed light on other races and skin colors.There were hardly any white, blue-eyes blonde people with thin frames, but rather tan/dark skinned people and an array of body types displayed. It seems that fashion is now shying away from the standard that beauty is one ideal physical body, but rather expressed through various appearances. Beauty can be found in someone obese, someone with tattoos, and someone with a certain skin color in their own way.

I also conducted a study on the American Eagle website, and clothing company that has been around for quite some time and is not considered to be progressive. What I found was that the models appeared to be predominantly white and thin, confirming my hypothesis that new fashion is taking a new route.

# data[].attributes.headline
Chapter 8: White Wedding/Marriage and the Family

# data[].attributes.subject
Chapter 8: White Wedding/Marriage and the Family

# data[].attributes.body
I feel as if the idea of a wedding has become glamorized more than marriage itself. Especially in today's generation, where social media has influenced a pandemic of instant gratification, the value of long-term commitments has declined. I believe the wedding day is important and should a day of great celebration; however, I believe it is dramatized to the point where the white dress and facebook posts have become more important than the marriage itself.
The text mentioned something interesting; that white-weddings emphasize patriarchal power dynamics. This is something that I never truly thought about before, for example the bridal shower. The soon to be mother is being conditioned towards her new life as a stay-at-home, while the groom gets a bachelor party with strippers and guy-talk. It is interesting how there is such examples of subliminal gender roles that doesn't occur to us until we ponder it. I would have to disagree with the concept that the dress and suit displays higher power from the man's side; I believe that it is simply a tradition that displays masculinity and femininity. Whether or not it has patriarchal roots, I see nothing wrong with it.
In conclusion, "white-weddings" have been  glamorized in the hollywood scene for years upon years. I do find it to be harmful because we place more emphasis on the event itself and not our partner. It has become popular to post photos on facebook, feed a bunch of people you don't know, and get congratulatory remarks from people you haven't seen since highschool. It is very superficial, but nonetheless a tradition that will be timeless.

# data[].attributes.body
Essentially, Coontz embarks on the idea that people assume American families face more problems now than they did in the past. The basis of this argument is that we are now recognizing the problems within our family values instead of ignoring them. Additionally, the flexibility of women's decisions as a result of gaining more rights since the 1950s have invited men to spend more time with their children. To a certain extent, I can agree with Coontz, but I feel that American families face different adversities. Yes, there is less of a patriarchal power dynamic than the 50s, allowing for more decision-making on the woman's part. However, families nowadays are faced with a few problems; social media influences on their child, decline of masculine and feminine role models, and less time with their parents due to more women working. I believe that parents face much greater adversity in censoring the ideas that their children see through social media, and how they are subjected to inappropriate influences that could be harmful to them. The worst part is that the child could be influenced without the parents knowing, due to the discreetness of social media on their phones. Additionally, I feel that masculine and feminine roles have declined with the prominence of gender equality movements. Men and women are equal, no doubt about that; but what I have observed is that parents are neglecting the complimentary dynamic between man and woman that leads to a healthy household. Overall, I cannot say whether we have more problems now than before or vice versa; however, families today are faced with different adversity as a result of social media influence on how families "ought to be" operated.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: JCB p. 243 Wedding Dreams

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: JCB p. 243 Wedding Dreams

# data[].attributes.body
When I was younger, I fantasized greatly about my future wedding and what it would entail. Coming from a Middle-Eastern background, I didn’t really fantasize about the white wedding phenomenon but more of a wedding that resembled my values. This dream wedding consisted of eccentric dancing, my loved ones joined together, and the joining between me and wife in eternal companionship. I then grew older and my views on relationships and marriage shifted drastically. I no longer have the “Hollywood” version of marriage implanted in my mind, where a Prince Charming and Cinderella have a beautiful grand wedding and have a successful marriage without any obstacles. I have come to terms with the fact that marriage is much more complex than I have imagined, and that a lot of people are malicious when it comes to long term relationships in this generation. As a result, my desire for a dream wedding has progressively declined. If I am to get married, I would still like all of the features I previously listed, but I no longer view my wedding as a grand ceremony that while cause a tear in the space-time continuum. I think the main reasons the white wedding concept doesn’t appeal to me is not only the culture I grew up in, but also the realization of how marriage truly works. While this may be cynical, marriage is much more of a business partnership than a romantic commitment, and thus my dreams about the perfect day have faded.

# data[].attributes.headline
277-286: Henslin, Eating Your Friends is the Hardest

# data[].attributes.subject
277-286: Henslin, Eating Your Friends is the Hardest

# data[].attributes.body
This text was many things; disturbing, rich, but most of all thought-provoking. It makes me think about how we as humans define our own reality. We collectively decide what is moral, what is immoral, what is respect and disrespect, and so on. The text mentioned that the Andes survivors viewed the human body as simply a mass of flesh, no longer carrying a soul. Comparatively, we eat burgers, steaks, and fried chicken all day long but do not acknowledge the food as once living beings. This brings me to a thought; why is cannibalism shunned upon? Let me be clear in saying that I am not an advocate for cannibalism, but under what basis is cannibalism deviant or immoral? The dead human body is nothing but flesh, however we attached a symbolic meaning to it. It would be extremely disrespectful to piss on a human’s corpse, and would even start an altercation. The human corpse in society’s lens is a trophy or representation of that human’s life, and should be treated with respect to honor that person. Yet, to the Andes survivors, the human corpse was food. By that regard, can we justify “immoral” behavior under certain circumstances? It is interesting how we can simply justify our behaviors, create new meanings, and define situations to our liking.

# data[].attributes.headline
315-321: Zimbardo, The Pathology of Imprisonment

# data[].attributes.subject
315-321: Zimbardo, The Pathology of Imprisonment

# data[].attributes.body
In essence, Zimbardo argues that the concept of prison results in pathological behavior from prison guards, and therefore acute trauma to the prisoners. The study in this reading involves normal citizens that were placed in a prison simulation. The guards not only embraced their role, but became so engulfed to the point where they abused their power and treated the prisoners as animals. Conversely, some of the fake prisoners subconsciously played into their role as if they were real prisoners. What this study tells me is that such a power dynamic can cause even the most righteous people to engage in behavior that they cannot control. When put in a situation that is conducive to abusing power, any individual is capable of pathological behavior. This leads to an even bigger issue, in regards to the real prison system and how there is a lack of rehabilitation. The text mentions how prisons are kept secret from the world, which holds true on a personal account because I only hear about prisons in the Hollywood movies. A majority of citizens are not exposed to the true nature of prison and how similar it is to a zoo; a multitude of people that are degraded into animalistic creatures by a higher authority. Prison reformation, especially in today’s social context, is one of the large problems that America needs to hash out. We even see non-violent offenders become subject to prison brutality, to a degree in which they might not feel remorse for committing a crime because of the treatment they faced. It is impossible to reintegrate inmates into society if they are not being actively encouraged in the prison system, otherwise these people will come out worse and more eager to wreak havoc.

# data[].attributes.headline
322-334: Rosenhan, On Being Sane in Insane Places

# data[].attributes.subject
322-334: Rosenhan, On Being Sane in Insane Places

# data[].attributes.body
Rosenhan conducted a study to determine whether or not physiatric hospitals can differentiate between mentally ill patients or sane patients. According to the results of the study, the hospitals were unable to differentiate the two and falsely diagnosed sane people as mentally ill. While I understand what the study was trying to prove, I am not exactly keen on what the message of the study is or what a Rosenhan is trying to convey to reader. My best interpretation is that labeling people as “insane” is completely overblown and exaggerated. In a sociological sense, we label mentally ill people as abnormal or insane, as if they are in a completely different world than “normal people”. However, the hospitals themselves could not even differentiate a sane person to a mentally ill person, thus highlighting the fact that we shouldn’t be able to either. Regardless of this fact, as a society has stigmatized mental illness as something abhorrent, and that those who are mentally ill should shunned and looked at differently.  The reality is that mentally ill people are far from different, to the extent that we pass them by on a daily basis without even knowing. That is what I believe to be the underlying message of Rosenhan’s study; if professionals cannot tell the difference, how can we?

# data[].attributes.headline
470-480: Hunt, Police Accounts of Normal Force

# data[].attributes.subject
470-480: Hunt, Police Accounts of Normal Force

# data[].attributes.body
This text is particularly relevant in today’s social context regarding the George Floyd incident as well as many others. America is currently undergoing a large conflict when it comes to police brutality and unnecessary aggression, particularly towards people of color. I was able to get an inside perspective regarding the police force and what behaviors are encouraged in the workplace, as well as which behaviors are shunned upon. What I gathered from the reading is that a majority of officers believe it is better to be safe than sorry, meaning it is justifiable to use extreme force when in a dangerous situation. An example that was mentioned was the female officer who refrained from shooting a store burglar when he was evidently violent, resulting in her being ridiculed by her colleagues. Now, I am not an officer, nor do I understand the obstacles that they face in they field; however, it seems that using illegitimate force as a safety blanket seems to be and encouraged behavior in the police force when put in a dangerous situation. My fear of this trend is that police officers will naturally gravitate to aggression and unnecessary force out of habit, even when the situation does not call for it. We saw a testament of this in the George Floyd incident, in which Floyd was clearly detained yet the officer continued to use aggression until it was lethal. My question is how do we find a balance between protecting our police officers, but ensuring that lethal force does not become the norm. I have great admiration for police officers, but I believe their duty is to protect the citizens the first and that aggression should not be their automatic response. I would be interested in a reformation movement that still encourages the safety of our officers, as well as proper management of dangerous situations.

# data[].attributes.headline
Required entry: Crazy People (Joyce Johnson)

# data[].attributes.subject
Required entry: Crazy People (Joyce Johnson)

# data[].attributes.body
I was recently in San Francisco this past weekend and I witnessed a “nude protest”. This consisted of a group of people that marched down the street completely naked, with the signs and loud verbal phrases that advocated for freedom of clothing and allowing people to legally be nude in public. Clearly, my reaction to seeing these protestors is that they are absolutely crazy and deviant. Only someone insane would march down the street in the nude and protest for this to become a norm. These people were violating a very obvious social norm that it is inappropriate to be naked in public, or at least that is the norm that society has taught us and to which we abide by.
What made it even more deviant was that this group of people were predominantly old people. While this behavior violates a social norm on its own, I believe that old people would be less likely to engage in a protest like this because they are more modest and subdued. I rarely encounter old people that attempt to challenge the status quo, especially in such a bizarre way. However, there is a factor worth mentioning that I began this post with; this protest took place in the great city of San Francisco. San Francisco is commonly known as a very liberal city that embraces freedom of expression, and very forgiving towards people that challenge the norms of society. When looking at the protest through this lens, it was much less surprising to me as opposed to this protest taking place in the conservative state of Texas. Although I viewed these people as crazy, I thought to myself, “well, that’s San Francisco for you!”. Meaning, I did not expect anything less of the city because I am aware of the freedom that it enables.
I’m terms of justifying the behavior, I cannot think of many situations to where I would say public nudity is rational. However, there are many places in the world where public nudity is embraced, such as nudist beaches. That is the only rational justification I can think of; you can be publicly nude in cultures that openly invite it.
The label “crazy” is very powerful to the point where it can become potentially destructive. My definition of crazy is an individual that behaves in a way that is not socially acceptable or appropriate. However, what is socially acceptable is subjective and thus I could be considered crazy to that same person for being publicly clothed. Labeling them as crazy is definitely limiting in a sense that I would not take that person seriously in a conversational sense. The nude protesters could be educated, successful, wise or insightful people, but I would never know because I preconceived them as crazy people for their behavior.