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.