28 October 2010: Page 426 #1

Native American Economy

When many people in America hear the words “Native American,” often times, there is a predictable myriad of assumptions and stereotypes that come into their minds. These are things such as lazy, living off the government, drunks, and several other words that generally all carry negative connotations. Many assume that the Native people live off the government by allowing them to put casinos onto reservations. Interestingly, however, Native Americans have a large impact on the American economy-and overall, it is quite a good and valuable impact.

A Harvard Project study came to find that “. . . no matter whether a tribe has undertaken gambling operations, its economy has grown at about three times the rate of the U.S. since the late 1980s” (“Economy growth faster for Native Americans”). This here exemplifies that regardless of whether a tribe builds a casino or not, their economic growth is continually rising, and has superseded that of the United States overall. Native Americans have begun to start rebuilding their governments and communities, and this is having an overall positive effect, “In recent years, tribes have been setting their sights on other lucrative opportunities from retail to banking to pharmaceuticals. And it's having a positive effect on state economies” (“Native American tribes contribute to state economies”).

 With the building up of these aspects, it is having a beneficial effect on the state’s economy where these tribes are located. When states are benefiting, this causes the overall American economy to benefit. In the state of Washington, the tribes there “contribute $1 billion annually to the state’s economy” (1). Furthermore, many tribes “are seeking to develop sustainable economies” (1). Here in Arizona, the Hopi tribe just purchased a shopping center in Flagstaff to contribute to the economy there (1). The Native American people are not living off the government; they are positively contributing to it.

I am half Native American and have seen some of the positive influences Native Americans have had on the economy. There are many stereotypes of this people, and in some cases they may be true, but not in a majority of cases. Native American tribes are taking it one step at a time, by starting to build up their own communities and this is having a national effect. If all communities would begin by building there, there would be an overall positive effect on the American economy.

Works Cited

“Economy growth faster for Native Americans.” The Arizona Republic. 26 June 2007.

“Native American tribes contribute to state economies.” State Legislatures. 26, 5. 31 May 2000. Web. 28 October 2010. 

26 October 2010: Page 418 #1

Living In a Material World

Materialism in temporary American culture is composed and juxtaposed in a binary opposition; it is both good and beneficial, while at the same time bad and destructive. Both of these opposites coexist and create our culture today.

Materialism is essential to our society because it allows for a capitalistic economy. Without our desire for goods, this type of economy could not operate, yet this type of economy has proven successful over time. It allows for people to create their own success by being able to sell their products to others. It allows for jobs because someone must create, market, sale, check out, and bag these goods. Materialism is a cycle that allows for progress and advancement. It puts in an aspect of competiveness, thus the market is constantly improving as people demand better things. Look at where we are today technologically. We can now communicate with any one, at any time, in any place. Due to materialism, this is possible.

As previously stated, materialism has its drawbacks. Due to our culture’s demand for goods, this creates waste. Materialism has caused our society to be focused on the self and we demand things from it for our own benefit. We have no regards for how the good was created, just as long as it helps us. For the younger generation, they expect things to be given to them. Every kid now expects to have cell phone, internet, and a myriad of other things. They no longer have to work for it or achieve anything to earn it; they expect it. Materialism often affects women and girls especially. They now need to wear certain clothes, buy certain make up, get certain surreys, all in order to have an identity in today’s culture. It is about oneself looking good, with no regard or concern for anyone else.

This then leaves the ultimate question; do the good effects outweigh the bad effects? In my opinion, they do not. There should have been a line that was drawn, because materialism is good to an extent. However, I feel we as Americans have overstepped that line and now demand things instead of work for them. We waste things, instead of appreciate them. I feel this is going to lead us further into a selfish, wasteful society, and nothing productive can come out of a culture with those motives as a basis for their society.

26 October 2010: Week 9 Blog Reviews

Lauren Spencer

“Manic Monday”

Ah! What a crazy day! That sounds absolutely awful. I thought you did a great job writing a sequence of events that happened to you. It flowed nicely and went well from one bad thing to the next. The only thing I would suggest would be to add a little more emotion. As a reader, I think it would be awesome if I could feel as frustrated as you were just by simply reading your paper. You did a great job overall describing a series of events in relation to corporate America.

“Music and Dancing”

I thought you had an interesting take on this topic. I really enjoyed how you incorporated and used music examples from today that portray female sexuality. I thought that added to the effectiveness of your paper and your argument. You have a few grammar errors, such as needed commas, in a few places, so be sure to be aware of that in future writing. Also, this was a bit choppy with lots of short sentences, so maybe try to break it up a little by doing long and short sentences. Overall, great job, I really enjoyed reading this post! J

Darien Allen

“Cars . . . or Weapons of No- so-Mass Destruction?”

GREAT introduction! You really drew me in as a reader right from the beginning. I thought you did a good job making the point that you were trying to. I enjoyed how you used a personal experience from your life to enhance the argument you were making. I do not really have any suggestions for this post to better it; I felt you did a wonderful job. J

“Popular Music”

This is a good summary about popular music today. I would have liked to have seen you take more of a stand or create an argument to stand by, such as its effects, whether negative of positive. I think what you wrote could be used as a good gateway into a paper about corporate America’s influence on popular music. Everything looked good to me grammatically, I think it would have been interesting to hear you expand just a bit more.

21 October 2010: Page 386 Directed Freewrite

Female Sexuality in Pop Culture

Throughout time, women have been second to men. This has been manifested continually in literature, politics, and a myriad of other things. Although as a society, we have progressed and evolved over time with this issue, women are still viewed as objects and not as equals to men. We see this profoundly illustrated today in pop culture music.

Some critics would argue that women “find both affirmation and power in the fear that their sexuality creates in men” (Lipsitz 378). However, the people saying this are men. Other critics would argue that women should find freedom in the fact that they are no longer being denied of their sexuality, “. . . sexual topics in dance-hall lyrics provide an alternative to the denial of women’s sexuality in most popular music” (378). They view that this type of music is a better alternative to other music, music that demonizes women. A critic by the name of Cooper goes as far to say that “. . . sex –affirmative songs by women in dancehall music need to be understood as a reaction against the masculinist . . .” (379).

Many members of communities where this type of music is popular, find it to be “irredeemable sexist” (378) and downright embarrassing to their communities. This type of misogyny is counterproductive of the point that critics are trying to make. Women who demonstrate their sexuality through music do it only for the pleasure of men and this type of music is produced for that purpose. It is not for women to express themselves; it is for the men with them to enjoy. It is said that “One manifestation of the misogyny exacerbated by new social relations comes through the symbolic value given to male perspectives in immigrant music” (380). It is about how men view women. It is about how men view women viewing themselves. There is no female perspective which ultimately is complexly misogynistic.

I am not a feminist and I feel often times too many people are. However, with certain things, such a pop culture, I find a clear demonstration of the objectification of women by men. Critics say multitudinous positive things about what this music does for women, but I feel for the most part it is not because they actually believe it. It is although they are trying to be politically correct, and say this regardless of their actual standpoint. Women have made great progress over time, but there is still room for more. 

19 October 2010: Page 363 Directed Freewrite

Marital Bliss or Corporate Chaos? 

It was the night of my wedding reception and I could not have been happier. I had just married the most wonderful person and was about to start my life with him. Not to mention, when people get married, everyone they know wants to give them free stuff from an array of corporate stores. I was exceptionally excited to open all the gifts and see how they would fit into my new home. After getting everything unwrapped, and put in its place, reality set in.

The next morning I went to wash my hands, using my new crystal soap dispenser to aid me in this process. Mammoth amounts of soap began coming out of the dispenser when I had pushed on the nozzle; the dispenser had broken and was now soap leaking everywhere! I immediately grabbed the new, fluffy towel that was hanging on the rack. I cleaned all of the soap up and threw the towel in the washer with some other dirty things. Later, when I went to go and move the dirty laundry from the washer to the dryer, my towel had looked like it had been eaten and was now in shreds (so much for quality). Needing a break from the tumultuous day, I laid down on my bed, hoping to get a well deserved nap. When I went to lay my head down I noticed one of the decorative pillows had a tear in it (a day later, cotton was spewing out of it). There seemed to be no relief from the gifts we had been given.

Needless to say, I ended up turning back to corporate America to replace all of the things that it had cost me in the first place. There seemed to be no escape from this vicious cycle. 

12 October 2010: Week 8 Blog Reviews

Amity Conolly:

5 October 2010-Love: It’s Only a Matter of Time

I don’t really have much to say about this post. I thought you did a good job organizing your thoughts with proof from the text. There were no major grammatical errors that I saw. You had a clear topic for each paragraph and transitioned into the others nicely. I loved this line in your essay, “Maybe the marriage vows will be altered slightly. Instead of ‘til death do us part’, the new vows can realistically read ‘til divorce do us part’.” I thought it was really clever and actually quite realistic. Overall you did a great job.

7 October 2010-Pandora’s Box

            This was a well written piece. Grammatically in your second to last paragraph you need a question mark instead of a period in one place. I felt at the beginning you were taking sides with animal homosexuality relating to human homosexuality, but at the very end you change sides. You did a good summary of the reading. I would have also liked to have seen your personal opinion in the post as well as what you did. Good work.

Mary Bak:

5 October 2010-Love??

            Good job on using paragraph form again. When you cite in-text, make sure your period goes after the parenthesis and not in the quote. I liked the scenario you used in your second paragraph. I would have liked to have seen you use quotes and passages from the text to support these claims to make your argument stronger. Then you could have had a lot more proof and validity to what you are saying. It is a good start of an idea, and I think with evidence it could become a lot better.

7 October 2010: Page 339 Critical Reading #1

Homosexual Nature

In “The Gay Side of Nature,” Jeffrey Kluger comes across a book by Bruce Bahemil entitled Biological Exuberance that explores and reports homosexual behavior in animals.  Upon reading about observations of animal behaviors, Kluger is clearly surprised by what he finds. Humankind believes that homosexual relationships are isolated to the race of man alone; not seen anywhere else in nature. Kluger, however, is astonished that he finds such opposition to this belief, “According to Bagemihl, the animal kingdom is a more sexually complex place than most people know-one where couplings routinely take place not just between male-female pairs, but also between male-male and female-female ones” (Kluger 338).

One of the most astounding things that he comes across is that “homosexuality comes naturally to other creatures” (338) and “same-sex partners don’t meet merely for brief encounters, but may form long-term bonds, sometimes mating for years of even life” (338). What he reads about animal homosexuality seems analogously parallel to what we see with homosexual humans. It shows him an argument that he had never previously considered when taking into consideration nature’s side of homosexuality. Furthermore, he is struck by the fact that these “forms go beyond mere sexual gratification” (338). Most people in relationships are in it for more than sexual pleasures; the same goes for same gender relationships in animals.

Many people oppose these claims saying that animals do not have a way of communication; these practices allow for alliances. They say this is just animal behavior and “Putting all that into a homosexual category seems simplistic” (339). Kluger’s tone of utter astonishment throughout the piece, fully demonstrates his surprise to this finding. It shows that this may be something he had never heard of, nor have taken into consideration in the past. Kluger also emphasizes his skepticism of surprise in the way he presents to the readers the arguments found against these findings. Overall, he takes no side on the argument, but is instead presenting his findings to an audience.

I myself found these behaviors surprising.  For animals just to “fool around” one with another of the same gender is one thing; reading that some animals, such as the goose, may homosexually be paired for life, is something that shocked me. I had never before heard this and it made me think about human’s ideas and stands on homosexuality. I had never before considered that it may be a part of nature. It is definitely an interesting insight.

Work Cited

Kluger, Jeffrey. "The Gay Side of Nature" Academic Communities/Disciplinary Conventions. Ed.Bonnie Beedles and Michael Petracca. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001. 337-339.

5 October 2010: Page 310 #1

Love: A Science?

     Throughout time, people always been intrigued, desired, or have possessed love. Brownlee says that “love is central to human existence” (Brownlee 295). Love is written into us; it is a part of our biochemistry. Love is said to begin in motherhood (295), largely due to two things; the amount of time and energy that a mother devotes to her child and a hormone called oxytocin that catalysts women into motherhood. So arguably, since birth, mankind has been the recipient of love. Furthering this idea of love being related to chemistry, love uses messengers such as brain endorphins or opiates (296) that are associated with certain feelings. Strong feelings of desire and longing are chemically engineered and we know it as love.

     Not only is love chemical, but it is biological as well. Biologically, we as humans are wired to do certain things such as flirt, court, and pair off. We each have a love map that works as a template for what “arouses you sexually, what drives you to fall in love with one person rather than another” (Fisher 304). These maps lead us to have tendencies to want to pair with one particular person, “Pair- bonding is a trademark of the human animal” (306). Pairing off tends to lead people to the decision to be married. Fisher says about Americans, “We marry for love and to accentuate, balance out, or make parts of our private selves” (308). In other words, we biologically mate to complete ourselves and not for economic, political, or family reasons.

     When taking into consideration these two elements of science, it can change the way one looks at the idea and emotion of love. The divorce rate is high in the United States, at about a fifty percent failure rate. However, looking at the reason why Americans marry, it makes sense that as we change, we may no longer need that person. Studies show that people who have more kids, are less likely to divorce, out of due obligation to a family. If Americans truly embraced chemical and biological love, we would come to more fully understand and accept divorce. People should not have more kids just because it statistics show that it makes a marriage last longer; that then can become an issue of overpopulation. We are made to desire one another and to fall in love. Divorce is not always a bad thing, understanding the chemical and biological aspects of love make this clear.

Works Cited

Brownlee, Shannon. "Biochemistry- What’s Chemistry Got to Do With It?" Academic Communities/Disciplinary Conventions. Ed.Bonnie Beedles and Michael Petracca. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001. 294-298.

Fisher, Helen. "After All, Maybe It’s . . . Biology." Academic Communities/Disciplinary Conventions. Ed.Bonnie Beedles and Michael Petracca. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2001. 299-309.

5 October 2010- Week 7 Blog Reviews

Amity Conolly:

“Meet Me Halfway”

I really liked the example for your life that you used. It demonstrated well a common occurrence among dialogue between men and women. I felt you incorporated quotes from the text well and I loved your last sentence. I have a few suggestions for your second paragraph. The last sentence is a fragment, so combine it with the previous sentence by using a comma. Also be sure to put question marks after your questions that you probe him with. You did a great job using a real life example to incorporate Tannen’s ideology.

“Reap What You Sow”

I was not sure if you were for or against abolishing monogamous, heterosexual marriage or not. However, I felt this was an extremely well written essay. You put in the quotes from the text flawlessly and I thought you did a great job describing evolutionary psychology and its relation to society today. I think this paper would be great for you to use to turn into our next large essay that is due. If you took a stand either for or against abolishing this type of marriage and use what you already have to prove it, your paper will be extraordinary and it would be long enough for the larger essay. Good work.

Mary Bak:

28 September 2010

Good job using paragraph form in this post. It greatly improved your writing and you were able to more fully develop your ideas. I would personally omit your first sentence from this and introduce the conversation you were having with your brother a little differently. You did well incorporating what Tannen was saying into your real life example. I definitely see an improvement from what I read this week from what I read last week. J Great job!