Don't Guys Like Gifts Too?!?

       As I entered my carpool this morning, I sat on the leather seats and made small talk with my fellow riders. The conversation was pretty limited, as it was 6:45am, but we seemed to discuss something that actually really made me think. One of the boys in the carpool made a joke about how the two girls were both carrying festively wrapped gifts with them and the two boys weren't. With Christmas approaching it seems to me that I couldn't even walk by a group I was involved with without them begging me to join their holiday gift exchange or secret santa of some sort, my fellow female rider said she couldn't agree more.  But apparently, as I was informed by the jealous boys in the car this morning, this wasn't the case with the male population. Neither of them had been invited into a gift exchange, and as I complained about my fear of having my secret santa identity revealed, the boys noted that they had never had such a worry, as they had NEVER participated in something like that. 

       This discussion really made me think about gender roles in our society, especially around the holidays. It hit me that it was so normal for girls to be involved in various gift exchanges, secret santas, cookie exchanges etc. While the very idea of adolescent boys sitting around a fire, listing to Taylor Swift's Christmas album, and exchanging homemade cookies was enough to make anyone laugh. Why was that I wondered? As I was informed by my male carpool-mates, "guys like presents too!" So then what is it that makes it so normal for girls to be doing such a thing and not guys?

       Maybe it dates back to a time where women were in the kitchen, or cleaning the home while the men went out and hunted. But now-a-days women are running corporate positions, owning companies, and holding high ranking medical positions. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2011 women accounted for 47% of all employment. So it seems to me that although women are no longer the homemakers that they once were, they still carry the stigma that they are the ones who are interested in homely things. Or maybe it is socially unacceptable from a male's perspective to want to bake cookies and exchange gifts? 

       Either way it is evident that there is a gender divide in such activities. And while I am surely not complaining about all the new nail-polish, Starbucks gift cards, and peppermint bark I have received from my classmates this past week, I do think it is worth a critical look, for as I have been told, "guys like presents too!" 

Randomly Selected?

         I came across a picture yesterday posted. Well, not really a picture. It was actually a screen-shot of a Snapchat. The world of Snapchat is one for a later discussion, but what I wanted to look at now was the content of this screen-shot Snap.

  The photo, shown here, is of a man with a turban. The man is relatively young, and is going through airport security. Although the photographer, the man pictured himself, seems to make light of an actually serious issue. The face of the man resembles a funny/shocked look common in many "selfies" (photographs of yourself, taken by yourself). The caption, which is typed across the screen and complete with a few emojis of a man in a turban, reads, "' Bout to get randomly selected." The word randomly is the one that has the most emphasis to me. I think if snapchat allowed more characters in the text line he would have put the word "randomly" in parentheses. As he is making a comment about racial profiling, and how the "random" searches, are actually not so random. 

This is a controversial topic. Whether or not the people who select who to use for these searches, uses racial profiling. And to what extent it is acceptable to use this racial profiling. From what I understand, the officers feel it necessary to profile people, to a slight extent, because there are so many people and not enough time to check them all. For example if they are looking for someone to search airport security they will choose a twenty something man with a turban over an eighty something white woman. It's hard for me, though, to see how this slight need to profile wouldn't be abused. If the only people the TSA scans are young middle eastern men, then they will miss real potential terrorists because the ones who aren't being searched will learn that they are not watched as closely. While I'm not suggesting that my grandma will be trying to sneak bombs through the airport, I think it is worth thinking about the extent that racial profiling is used, and whether or not it should be used at all.     

Baby's Future?

Yesterday I saw an interesting a documentary on America's "failed" drug war called The House I Live In. It discusses how drugs are represented in our society, and how race and class play a role in arrests for the War on Drugs. One thing that stuck out to me was something Harvard professor William Julius Wilson said. He claimed noticing a sad reality in our country, that if one were to walk through the halls of a hospital and pass by new born babies, one could determine each baby's future just by knowing their race and class.
According to American ideals, we can be as successful as we want to be. We can move up in social class with enough hard work and determination, right? Well, not according to Wilson's claim. He seems to believe that it is actually very hard for a poor minority baby to rise above the violence and lack of education, to succeed in the same way as say a wealthy white baby. Unfortunately, it seems that when I thought about it further, Wilson's claim seemed to be true. When we hear about a poor African American, who grew up in a low income neighborhood, rising above it and becoming successful, we think it to be an amazing feat. "Wow! He was a really remarkable person!" Or, "wow! Oprah is an inspiration for overcoming such a difficult situation."
While I believe that it is important to recognize these accomplishments, should we really be that surprised that this kind of thing can happen? Don't American ideals tell us that no matter where we start, we can end up anywhere? So why are these accomplishments so rare.
And although while walking past hundreds of babies at a hospital you may see the next Oprah, will the other babies all just become another high school drop out or an imprisoned drug dealer?

Family Ties Stronger then Iron Bars?

          With the holiday season amongst us, I have been seeing signs of strong family ties everywhere I look. Children are taught to make poems and turkey cut-outs that include the statement "I am thankful for my family." As cliche as it may sound, I think this time of year really reminds us how important family really is. What Americans go through in order to see their loved ones during the holidays, for just a day, or a few hours or even a minute, really reflects the American value of family.
         

 With this in mind, I thought carefully as my American Studies class talked about the "Prison  Industrial Complex." An intimidating phrase at best, loaded with controversy, statistics, and pain. In short, the Prison Industrial Complex (or PIC for short), is a term used to describe the current state that many see in America's prison system. As the prison systems are becoming supplied by private sectors, these private sectors are starting to own the prisons. With private groups owning anything, there is a clear desire for profit, and with this desire comes the controversy. To these private groups, more inmates means more profit, so the more people arrested, the richer these groups get. As selfish as it sounds, it is reality. More people are being arrested today then ever before. As is clear in the graph shown, the prison population rates have increased dramatically over the past 30+ years, however the violent crime rate has gone down. A conclusion can easily be made that the things people are getting arrested for these days is not violent crimes, but rather more menial crimes that result in arrests for the prison's profit.
            With all of this in mind regarding the PIC, I go back to my original thought of family ties. I am quite aware that to be in prison, you must have done something wrong, and often times it is something extremely wrong that prisoners were sentenced for. However, it seems that with the PIC there have been more arrests then ever made on people who really shouldn't be serving a sentence at all. I suddenly began to feel a lot of sympathy toward the young children of imprisoned parents. I thought about the family ties, and how much Americans value family. So when these children go and visit their parents, I can't help but wonder what is going through their mind. The children give so much just to have a quick conversation with their beloved parent. I wonder however, what kid of respect these kids can have for their parents. If their parent was a victim of an unjust sentence, do the children know that, or do they see their Mom or Dad as just another bad guy. I would be interested in hearing about how others feel these children's lives are effected by their parents imprisonment, and if you believe the PIC is a direct cause for these children's potential misery.

Elmo's World Like Our Own?

        Toy companies are in their busy season with the holidays just around the corner, and today I read an interesting article on toys. Actually a specific toy, the plush red toy named Elmo. Almost everyone has heard of this lovable little creature, he appears in Sesame Street, and on the shelves of every toy store. The article prosed a fascinating question, why are kids so obsessed with Elmo? And it made me think about not only Elmo, but about all the toys that children obsess over. Because there has to be something that makes one toy more appealing then another, even to the most simple of minds.
        The article suggests that children want to play with a friend who sees the world like they do, and who better to play with then the fuzzy red guy who like them is "curious, open-minded, fun, loves to learn new things, very optimistic, and happy-go-lucky (Elmo Fever)." This however is a concept that goes far beyond the shelves of "Toys R Us." Not only do the young like people (or furry animals) who see the same world like they do, but people of all ages value this characteristic.
        There are many instances in our society that demonstrate the characteristic of people liking people who see the world like them. For example, immigrants formed sections of the city with other immigrants from their country. China town, German district, and the "south-side Irish", are a few that are still around today. This could be explained as having come from such similar cultures causes people to see the world similarly, and want to be with each other. What are your thoughts on this phenomenon? Do you see any other examples of this in your everyday life?

Too Many Men in the Kitchen?

      Today I stumbled upon an interesting article in The Week. It discussed a list that Time Magazine produced of the top 50 "gods of food" in America. Interestingly enough, there were only thirteen women present on this list, and among these thirteen women, none were actually chefs. This came as a big surprise to many, and The Week said that this must be because chefs are a male dominated profession.
      Later in the article however, it is said that in reality about 20% of chefs now a day are women. This made some commenters very angry, that the Time gods of food list didn't contain any women even though the industry is actually 20% women. To me, two things stick out. First, I wonder how the editor of Time selected his "gods of food" list. Does he really believe that the only chefs worth divine recognition are males? And the second being that still after the fact, 20% seems like a low number of women in the chef industry. After all, haven't women been known to be the cooks in our families throughout American history?
      It seems that a consistent stereotype throughout American history has been women as the cooks in a family. Most American families still run with this tradition, having the mother cook a homemade meal for the family each night. It seems odd to me that even though women have been known to be the chefs of the family, they in fact aren't the majority of chefs of today's world. Is this representative of the fact that men have also been portrayed as the breadwinners? Does a women have a place in the kitchen only in the comfort of her own home?

Airborne

Traveling this weekend to Boston, I noticed lots of differences in the TSA security. And for the first time in a long time, it seems to me that instead of the security becoming more strict, it seems to me that it has become a bit more relaxed.
Since 9/11, the security in airports has gotten increasingly more strict. I came across a timeline of important events that have sparked new TSA regulations over the past 12 years or so on travelinsurence.org.
*November 2001-After 9/11, TSA was created to make air travel safer
*December 2001- Passenger tries to ignite a "shoe bomb", TSA requires passengers to take off their shoes in order to pass through security
*August 2006- Liquid explosives are attempted to bring aboard an aircraft, TSA requires all liquids aboard to now be reduced to small travel sized containers
*October 2007- In response to attempted remote control explosives, the TSA adds additional carry-on scanning devices to security
*November 2010- TSA introduces full body x-ray scanners that display completely nude x-rays of passengers, full body pat downs introduced
*October 2013- TSA Pre allows passengers to get a background check before entering the airport, to make security easier
It seems to me that after a period where the news from TSA was about newly implanted technology that makes it harder to get on board a flight, the TSA is backing off a little, and trying to now make it easier. Will these new freedoms cause more problems in airports? Or appease the unhappy passengers who claim to feel invaded during the random pat-downs.
Just last week their was a shooting in the Los Angeles airport, where a man shot down and killed a TSA agent. Will this cause the TSA to become more strict? I mean how much more could they possibly do?!? Or will this be brushed off, and the government will continue to try and make it easier for passengers to get through security. Comment below.

More Candy=More Success?

With halloween being this past week, I watched as dozens of children bombarded my front door in hopes of some candy. Despite the fact that the weather that night was terrible, with constant downpours of rain, trick-or-treaters ran from house to house collecting their candy and laughing. Although I knew that this was me just a few years back, I wondered what it was that made this youngsters feel the need to go "trick-or-treating." I mean with the amount of candy they collect wouldn't cost more then ten dollars in its equivalent at Walgreens. What is it then, that makes these kids want to go get their candy themselves, in the pouring rain, then just go out and buy some. I think the answer to this question reflects an important American value. The value that reward is better when you earned it, and that having a good work ethic will get you far.
According to Forbes magazine, America ranks in the top 10 for countries with most socio-economic mobility. This means that America, compared to the rest of the world, has an enormous possibility for people who are born into poor circumstances, to succeed and become wealthy. I believe that this is because of the work ethic that is taught to us through our culture. The work ethic that we want to earn something by working. Like kids want to eat the candy that they earned.

Little Girls?

  Recently I came across an anti-obesity campaign in Atlanta Georgia, strong4life, released this photo as part of its ad campaign to stop childhood obesity. The poster (shown here) is of a heavier young girl, but the unflattering camera angle makes the girl seem even heavier then she is. The girl in the black and white photo stands with her arms crossed, and with an an angry look on her face. Bright red letters read “warning, its hard to be a little girl if you’re not.” It seems to me that this photo suggests that to enjoy your childhood as an average American girl, you must be skinny.
   
  The word that most sticks out to me is little. It refers to being little in age, and in size. The way the ad uses it as a play on words, puts an emphasis on it. Making the distinction that in order to be a child or "little" girl, you must in fact be skinny or "little". Is this poster telling us that in order to fit into American society you must be skinny? I know many people say that Americans are pressured to look like barbie, and be fit and thin, but we are getting the same message from anti-obesity campaigns as well! Will my love for cheeseburgers cause me not be able to fit into our society!?

Funny or Disgraceful?

     In American Studies today, we had a discussion on the Minstrels of the 1800's. For those of you who don't know, Minstrels were people who dressed up in different costumes, and put on shows for money. Many of these minstrels were African American people. Some of these African American Minstrels would mock themselves, putting on a skit of jokes about African American stereotypes. Since it was so profitable, white people began to doing the same kinds of shows. To make matters even worse, the white person would cake their face in charcoal, to give the impression that they were actually black, these people were called black faces. I saw a recreated version of such a skit on an informative website about these black faces. I urge you to check out this link to watch this video. It gave me chills and filled me with disgust that someone could mock such an innocent class.
To make matters EVEN worse, sometimes the blacks would also paint their faces black, so they could make even more fun of themselves. It seemed so weird to me that people would do such a thing. Go on stage and make fun of themselves, and dehumanize their own race and culture.
My research was cut short because I had to go with my advisory to see our schools "Lagniappe" show. Every year, my school puts on a play called Lagniappe. In this show, written by students with no teacher input allowed, skits are put together making fun of our school and community. Immediately my mind went back to the Minstrels. Never before have I really questioned why we do this show at our school, but always just enjoyed the hilarious skits making fun of everything from our teachers to stereotypical "north shore moms". But there was an unmissable connection between the two. Both were satirical shows pointing out the flaws of a certain culture. I began to wonder if a really these types of shows were a bad thing? I never thought of Lagniappe as rude demoralizing our culture. But since learning about the Minstrel shows, my old favorite Lagniappe show seemed like a disrespectful practice. Knowing that the two different events were on much different scales (Lagniappe not being none to anyone really outside of our New Trier community) made me feel better. But I still wonder if the roots of these satirical shows really make them wrong to see.    

Who is College Really For?

Upon entering junior year at my high school, everything changes. From the first bell there is a tension that is present. Everyone knows that junior year is supposedly the toughest year of high school, and in preparing for college everyone knows what they need to do to get in to the school they have in mind, or maybe the schools their parents have in  mind. Many parents put immense amount of pressure on their teens to get good grades, and higher test scores. They want their child to get into the "best schools."
  An article by the Boston Globe, entitled Parents Get Competitive on College, discusses the pride that some parents get when their child is admitted into an elite college. One contributor Bruce Feiler quotes that “There are very few benchmarks by which parents can evaluate whether they’re doing a good job, and for a certain segment of parents, there’s no better benchmark than college admission."
However shallow this might seem to some, it is really a reality. I personally feel that a lot of times it is the parents who pressure their students to the point of over-stress in this junior year. It seems to me that there are many parents who are more worried about what school their child gets into, then the child's quality of life, currently and when the child starts his or her first day of college.
I remember dropping my older sister off at college early this fall. Upon walking around the campus and seeing all the scared faces of incoming freshman, it hit me that it is truly more important to find a place where you are comfortable then where it is considered "more elite." My sister attends Miami of Ohio and for her the school was her dream school. But if faced with the choice between that or say Harvard, I feel as if my parents would've insisted she attended Harvard, even though she fits in perfectly at Miami and couldn't be happier. Her face on the first day was relaxed and at peace, as if she had just made a perfect match in a puzzle.
Many of even the most intense parents would probably agree that it would be disheartening to see their child walk into a place where they plan to live for the next four years, and not fit in or be completely miserable. But even with this being said, it seems that in the rush of college planning most parents would pressure their child to choose a school that was considered "harder to get in to." I wonder what it is about the rush of college planning that really makes parents make so uncharacteristic choices? And although the benchmark of admission to a school is definitely a factor, I feel as if there must be something more.
So what is a "good school", is it a school that generates the most income, a school that is ranked at the top of the lists, a school with the most caring professors? Or is "good school" all a relative term?

You mean Teddy?

I recently viewed an bizarre documentary called Grizzly Man. The documentary was about Tim Tredwell, a grizzly bear fanatic who died being killed by a ferocious bear, ironically trying to save the grizzly himself. Although alot of the film made me really thing-k, one thing that caught my eye was when the director showed shots of Tim cuddling up with a plush furry bear. My mind couldn't help but see how he treats the toy bear and the real bears so similarly. Tim runs up to the animals and talks to them and touches them, the kind of behavior that got him killed.

What I found fascinating was thinking about how hazardous these animals were, and how innocent the toy representation of them was. The way that Tim treated these bears, and his stuffed bear, reminded me of when I was a child playing with my own stuffed teddy bear. I would cuddle up with it, bring it all over my house, and even outside into my backyard. I loved my stuffed bear, as many children do, but until recently did I really begin to wonder why it is a bear that seems to be the quintessential toy for every American child. An animal that is so dangerous and ferocious somehow made into the most adorable fuzzy creature a child can get their hands on. I think it is funny that out of all the stuffed animals made, it is the bear that children seem to be most drawn to, or that our society portrays children to be drawn to. It is in our society that I have begun to notice other cases of where we try and take something that is actually big and scary, such as the grizzly bear, and make it something cute and fun and innocent. Take toy soldiers for example. Many will agree war is not a fun thing, it is very serious, heavy, and devastating, yet children play with toy soldiers, and play games of war, for fun.
I wonder what these things say about our society as a whole? Are we good at taking things with a grain of sand, and not really worrying about the significance behind them, for it is all fun and games? Or are we disrespecting those who give their lives for our country, and comprising all of their troubles down into a plastic green figure for children to laugh about while hiding in their sand boxes?
    I personally feel that it is a somewhat combination of the two but mainly the fact that we take these things with a grain of sand to save us the trouble. We take things that are really a big deal and make them not seem like a big deal to save ourselves the distress. Take the government shutdown as an example. Although it seems so strange to think that currently the people who represent our country have all just stopped doing their job, we do not really fret about it. No one has mentioned it in school, and my parents do not seem to be in fear that it is that big of an issue. I think we do this because if we worry too much about something we cannot control, and something that will soon be back to normal anyhow we will cause ourselves unnecessary distress. We take these things as less of a big deal, or look at the happier side of them for our own good. If we worried that anything closely relating to war or soldiers was directly correlated with death and despair, we would drive ourselves crazy! Just as if we looked at every child's teddy bear as the one who killed humanitarian Tim Tredwell, we would be living in a world of grief.

Got to Have it?

       Everyone around me has been talking about the newly released iPhone and how they can get their hands on it. The ones who lucky enough to already own the device are idolized, and those who don't yet have it seem to be making plans for when they will be able to get hold of the hot new technology. According to apple.com, the sales of the device within the first weekend topped 9 million and sales numbers continue to rise.
  Although I will admit, I envy my friends who have the new phone already, I wonder what it is that makes us want this phone so much. Is it really the cool new features? Because as far as I can see, the only features that the new iPhone has that are not available for download on earlier apple devices, are the state of the art fingerprint scanner, and the newly improved camera. So then why does this new device make us so crazed. Personally I think it is because of the title that each iPhone has. The title at the time of the release that tells us that this is what society is going to envy. The title that says if you are among the first ones to own this device, you will be envied and idolized. I still remember the feeling I got of superiority when I got the iPhone 5 the day it came out. Everyone wanted to hold my sleek new gadget, and when my phone would die at a friends house and they would offer me a charger, I boast in my reply that I could not use their old iPhone 4 charger, because the new iPhone came with a brand new type of charger. Now almost a year of that iPhone's arrival, no one asks if they can see my phone, because this iPhone isn't one that is cool anymore, it is the iPhone 5s.
  The unappeasable desire to always have the newest gadget tells us something about our society. It tells us that no matter what we have, we can always have better. No matter what we say, we can always say better. No matter what we do, we can always do better. It seems to me that there is an ongoing unrest imbedded within us that we cannot control.
  Although it sounds bad, I think that this unrest is just what keeps us as a society on our toes, keeps every fall exciting to see what new technology comes out, and gives us something to always work for. If the need to always have the best is imbedded in who we are, the need for always doing our best must be too. A trait that helps us as a society move forward, and helps us be able to invent new things, such as iPhones. So maybe the desire that makes us want the new phone, comes from the desire to get the new phone.  

        The other day in my American Studies class we looked at an excerpt of Studs Terkel's "Division Street America." Although unable to read the book in its entirety, the small excerpt we looked at really stood out to me. Terkel interviews different members of the Chicago community, and hits on themes such as racial and class segregation of different Chicago. In the introduction Studs mentions that there are some wealthy northern suburbs of the city referred to as the "North Shore." Studs mentions how the North Shore suburbs "give or take a token black, are lily white," which is actually scarily true. Having been raised in the area, I was taught to appreciate where I came from, appreciate the school system, and the security and everything else that comes with living here. I had been told from a young age that in parts of the city only a short drive away, people were being shot late at night, and troubles of crime and poverty were taken precedent over the troubles of terrible school systems, and high school dropouts. Unfortunately all of these things are true, and although mayor after mayor tries to change the case, there has been little drastic progress on the situation. I had almost always associated local poverty with the "inner-city" as people refer to it. Yesterday however, I was introduced to a new group of impoverished Chicagoland natives, the Waukegan bulldogs.
After a long day at school my tennis team hit the courts to play the Waukegan bulldogs in a tennis match. Me and my doubles partner felt terrible during our match, when we would hit our softest shot, and the girls across the net would scramble away as if it were going to concuss them. The team looked as if none of them had ever picked up a racket, and the embarrassment their eyes broke my heart. Of corse, I had played them before on previous teams and noticed their lack of proper equipment, and skill, but since reading the Studs Terkel article, it dawned on me that these impoverished people who actually do live in the Chicagoland area, do not receive the attention that the inner city poverty does. I looked more into the numbers and found that according to USA statistics, in 2012 17.90% of Waukegan's population was living below the poverty line. In Chicago 18.45% of families are living below the poverty line. Although there is a difference in the numbers, they are surprisingly close. Never had I realized how poor these people actually were. In my school career we had been so driven to the fact that Chicago inner-city was poor (a sad but true fact) but teachers seemed to have missed another place just as bad about an hour north. Even Stud's Terkel in his "ABC's for non Chicagoans" introduction to his book, discusses the area from the city all the way to Lake Forest, but seems to miss the area only a few suburbs north that is in terrible shape as well. There could be many reasons why people including Studs broadcast the cities conditions but simply miss other poor areas such as Waukegan's. They could not include the area in their reports on purpose to draw more attention the the contrast between the extreme poverty in the city and the extreme wealth in the North Shore, or they could just simply not have any idea that there is crime and poverty happening outside of the inner-city. I feel that these areas should receive more attention and help for their worsening situations. As hard as it is to say it, although the city needs lots of help, there are other places that need it too. And there is a lot of work to do.

 

Competition

Today on CBS a brightly dressed news anchor reported a story about a man who failed at his goal to cross the Atlantic Ocean in a small wicker craft attached to about 300 helium balloons. The man, Jonathan Trappe from Maine, had already flown across the English Channel and over the Alps using his mechanism, but now he wanted to fly across the Atlantic. The story reminded me of the other recent news article about Diana Nyad, the sixty year-old women who swam from Cuba to Florida without a shark cage, in attempts to break another record. What is it about these Americans that makes them want to do such risky things just to simply win the pride of achieving a "record" or being the "best". I believe that it is rooted from a young age, in the natural environment that american children grow up in.
The idea that kids need to be the best at something, at least as it seems to be impeded in the values of North Shore culture, starts at a young age. Babysitting this weekend, I talked to eight year old Jimmy about the sports he plays. At the young age of eight, Jimmy could already tell me his life plan in the department of his favorite pastime hockey. "Im going to first make it onto A1 travel this winter, then I'm gunna play a lot and make varsity at New Trier as a freshman, and then go to Michigan on a scholarship and play as a center on the varsity team there all my years at college." Surprised that the kid had more of his life planned out then me, we proceeded watching Spongebob. Then he chimed in, that in order to do this he had to take Will's (his best friends), spot on the team. The idea of such a specific plan, that started with the potent goal to replace his friends spot on the team, really got me thinking. It must be something his parents tell him that makes such a young kid want to say such a thing. Of course, it is completely normal for kids to have big goals, but deeper than that, it seems that in the society we live in, kids are raised to always be thinking about how to be the best, the brightest, and the fastest. World record books are a staple in every household, and game shows, and sports games are recorded on every DVR. It is no wonder that when some of these American kids grow up, they feel the never appeased desire to do such crazy things, just to beat everyone out. In a New York times article titled The Competing Views on Competition, Matt Richtel says "I’ve already done my part to promote the value of competition, almost completely unconsciously. I’ll talk about whether the San Francisco Giants just won their game. He knows that someone is going to be elected president and someone else is not." It is virtually impossible to grow up in our society without having some sort of competitive pressure at one time or another, but maybe, this is what makes our society thrive. The deep imbedded value of competition just might be the thing that gets our society thinking about how to solve the next problem, invent the newest medical device or smart phone. Some may argue that maybe then the discoveries and achievements made by people is simply out of self greed. The idea that they want to be the one who is known as the best scientist, or doctor, or computer programer, or swimmer. However personally I feel that maybe this is what is needed in every society. The idea that everyone wants to be the best, so then even if people do things out of personal greed, they do things that help the society grow as a whole.

America's Best Representatives?

It is hard to have missed Miley Cyrus’s erotic behavior at the VMA’s this summer. Almost everyone has seen the video or heard someone talk about the performance. Widespread controversy has circled regarding it and many concerned parents of American children claim that the performance is setting a terrible example for Miley’s easily influenced young fan base. What many people have not however begun to think about is the bigger picture. The idea that halfway around the world, foreign people are seeing Miley’s performance and getting the impression that this raunchy celebrity, as well as many others, are the best of the best of American citizens.  Everyone knows how hard it is to make it big in Hollywood, so then the ones that do make it big must be our best correct? Well although the logic is sound, it seems to me that these Americans are not the ones that I know and love. While traveling to Spain this summer, I had the pleasure of meeting some long lost friends in the Catalonian countryside. While sitting under their terracotta roof I had the chance to really get to know some young Spaniards. The girls of the family had grown up speaking Catalan, Spanish, and English so it was not hard to communicate. After arriving at the house however, the youngest of the girls Lola, greeted me as if I was some sort of divine being. Grabbing my hand and leading me through the doorway she uttered,

 “So your American! Who do you know that is famous?!”

Although the girl was a bit young and naive, her comment brought up a valid point, people across the world think that our society is made up of these stars, or people trying to be like these stars. They assume that these famous names are the best America can offer, and that everyone else in the states, is just trying to be like these people. Assuming that these people are what all Americans are like, I cannot help but wonder, do they think that these songs really represent our society?

            In a New York times article from right after the VMA’s, Jon Caramanica discusses how Miley is not the only one who seems to be putting bad examples into the press. He discusses other hits from the summer, and summarizes that “these songs are about caress, from the lyrics to the fatty bass lines to the lustless singing. For the most part, they’re adult-oriented records seeping down into the pop universe” (Blowing the Smooth out of the Summer).  Caramanica hits the nail on the head when he accuses not only Miley but many other musicians of releasing songs containing indecent lyrics. It is these lyrics that people see and associate with American culture. What Caramanica seemed to miss however are the performances and music videos that go along with these songs. Even the less obvious suggestive lyrics can be explained through an “X” rated music video just a click away. After all, it was Miley’s performance at the Video Music Awards that sparked the discussion. These videos depict twisted pictures of what real American society is outside of some billionaire’s LA recording studio. Such as the controversial video behind the song We Can’t Stop by Miley Cyrus. That flashes between images of people eating Marshmallows, Spaghetti OH’s, Wonder Bread and French fries, and sexual dancing, and teens drinking and smoking. The two elements being in such close proximity appear that they would make it even easier for foreigners to look on and incorrectly make a correlation between these grotesque stars and everyday Americans.

            There would be no issue if there were to not be a fan base supporting the billion-dollar industry. Which makes us Americans look even worse because we are the ones supporting it. When its all said and done the artist really only wanted the money, and if Miley can make 150 million dollars by age 25 doing what she’s doing, she will.

            Cyrus and Thicke came together at the VMAs and preformed the now infamous show. A show that concerned mother’s worry will influence their daughters, which to me sums up how the American society views these people. Although the mothers sitting on their couch in suburbia shielded their daughters’ eyes, they watched in amazement. Both disgusted and intrigued, and maybe intrigued in the disgust, we support this business unknowingly. We support this crude business by falling for their trap; we fall in head first while watching half-naked Americans make fools of themselves in front of millions. And millions who are ever-judging and making opinion’s at whole of our society based on what they see. But hey, we are the ones who gave Miley two million YouTube hits, so from a screen in Lleida Spain, Miley Cyrus is the best of the Americans, and according to Lola, “Miley and (I) are like neighbors!”