Must Be Dreaming

As written in James Truslow Adams' 1931 book, The Epic of America, reprinted in the Library of Congress, the "American Dream" is "a dream of social order in which each man and each woman shall be able to attain the to the fullest stature of which they are innately capable... with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement (Adams). Looking exclusively at the bolded words, "social order, shall be able to attain the fullest stature according to ability or achievement." More simple put, if one has ability or achievements, they should have no problems in achieving the social order in which they so desire. Is it that simple though?


I'm writing this post on a MacBook Pro Laptop. Any endeavors I've ever wanted to pursue have been accommodated by my parents. My parents. The emphasis on parents is crucial in these circumstances. A New York Times article reported that "children generally follow their parents' educational trajectory, that premium increases the importance of family background and stymies people with less schooling." The conclusion that can be drawn from this article is that since children follow their parents' educational trajectory, a child's parents depict a large portion of which social class they fall under as adults.

My parents provided me with the opportunity of attending New Trier High School, one of the most renowned schools in the entire country. This opportunity they provided me with has given me a world class education, which greatly increases my odds of staying in the upper class as an adult. As I am writing this, our family's landscapers are working outside. One worker jumped out at me in particular. A boy. Appearing well younger than I am, he is mowing my lawn. Something I have never done in my life and frankly, don't know how to do. Tonight is a school night, as I am working on my school work, he is doing manual labor, working presumably for his father. His father, another landscaper, probably didn't receive a high-class education, which created this cycle for his son to most likely follow.

Without a question of a doubt, this boy has ability and the work-ethic apparently required to achieve the social order in which James Truslow Adams so clearly laid out. However, it's just not that simple. America is largely on a vicious cycle where upper class families remain in the upper class and lower class families keep steadfast in the lower. The American Dream has revealed itself to be a myth: something that looks good on paper, but isn't legitimate.

The opportunities presented to me in my life have basically made certain my continuity on the upper class path. The most brutal part about the American "caste" is even if the working boy has more talent, desire and ability than I do, it's incredibly unlikely that he will surpass me in social order. This ever apparent cycle is a brutal realization made clear to me by the work of this one boy.

What do you think about social order in America? Do you feel it is predetermined based on the opportunities presented to you in your life? Share your thoughts!

The (Ridiculous) Last Meal

In continuation of my last post about the treatment of inmates on death row being too soft to be a deterrent, I feel that the "Last Meal" is a reasonable idea in concept, but with individual states and our country as a whole in so much debt, ridiculous. 

Given, the cost of a meal may not seem to be really anything at all in the scope on the incarceration of an individual preparing for death, but some meals requested are absurd and again, not a deterrent for prospective murderers. If criminals understood their fate before committing crimes, like consuming life-sustainable food, but nothing enjoyable, crime rates would decrease. The last meal of their lives, which, in my opinion, shouldn't exist, consists of prison-approved foods, though the list must be very extensive. Although restrictions are placed in some states in regards to cost limitation and allowance of said meal, there have been historically outrageous fulfilled requests that do not serve as a deterrent in the slightest degree. 

Ronnie Lee Gardner was convicted of burglary, robbery and two counts of murder. The murdered people obviously aren't capable of getting any requests fulfilled now that they are dead. In my book, Gardner should not have any requests fulfilled as well. However, he was allowed a meal of lobster tail, steak, apple pie and vanilla ice cream. All while watching the Lord of the Rings Trilogy!

One of the most outrageous requests that was fulfilled has to be the request of John Wayne Gacy. Gacy, dubbed the "Killer Clown", sexually assaulted and murderer at least 33 young men and teenage boys in the Chicagoland area in the 1970's. This psychopathic and ruthless murderer, who shoved raped, dead bodies in his crawlspace in his basement, was allowed a literal feast. A feast to the tune of 12 fried shrimp, a bucket of KFC original recipe, french fries and pound of strawberries. 

These last meals and many more, found on this webpage, show the freedom of choice that I don't believe prisoners on death row should have. For the pain and suffering they have inflicted on the victims, their families, loved ones and friends, such privileges should not be permitted. Not only for the sake of equality, but also for the sake of deterrence. 

What do you think about last meals? Should prisoners have this freedom of choice? Leave a comment with an opinion!

Capital Punishment: Level of Deterrence

An Arizona jury is currently deliberating on giving convicted first-degree murderer Jodi Arias the death penalty or life in prison. Arias was convicted of killing her then-boyfriend in a gruesome matter. Stabbing him more than twenty times and shooting him in the face. She pled self-defense in the matter, but the jury didn't agree  For more on her prosecution and implications, check out this article.

Looking further into the issue though of life in prison versus the death penalty though has me thinking. I truly don't think that the death penalty or life in prison is a deterrent for criminals. If one is to be sentenced to the death penalty, the execution doesn't occur quickly to say the least. Prisoners on death row are held for longer and longer periods of time, as shown by the picture below. 

Although it is hard to see, the average time spent on death row was about 15 years in 2010. This figure is up from about 6 years in 1984. The time these prisoners spend on death row is something "laughable" according to New York Poster writer Andrea Peyser. In her article, she noted that a professor went to the Connecticut Death Row and was "appaled" by the treatment the inmates receive. A man convicted of raping and burning a family to death, now on death row, has the leisure to take afternoon naps at his leisure, watch color television and eat junk food like Hershey's chocolate bars. 

I may seem somewhat brutal when I say this, but I want to see convicted murders suffer. I want to grow up in a world where I need not worry about violent crime. If prisoners started to be treated like prisoners and not like privileged children, I know that crime rates would decrease. I am certain that criminals would avoid committing crimes, conscious of the punishments that lay ahead. For now though, life in prison and even on death row may be a better alternative to the lives some criminals live. Until a change is made, I don't think the United States will see a significant drop in violent crime. 

What are your opinions? Do you think treatment to inmates on death row and prison is too soft? Share with a comment below!

So Easy, A Woman Can Do It!

During a commercial break of Sportscenter, an ESPN show, one commercial in particular really stood out to me. The lengthy version of it is below, though the only part shown was really the beginning.

That's right. A woman was using the lawnmower. Although this may come across as a little ridiculous, I inferred some deeper marketing meanings. I have never seen a commercial featuring a woman using a lawnmower; men were always the feature. Mowing the lawn is normally a job done by a man, which is why the commercial means a whole lot.

I am often intimidated by the commercials advertising lawnmowers. They seem somewhat confusing to operate, especially with the ease the men featured mow lawns with. In this commercial though, a woman was mowing the lawn with ease.

This casting choice by Cub Cadet definitely taps into men across the country. I believe Cub Cadet made a conscious decision to slip in the message: "Shouldn't everything a woman be able to do, a man do too? If you think so, then this lawnmower, which is easy to use because even a woman can do it, is perfect for you." Now although it may not be as explicit and harsh as what I stated, I know this was a subliminal message.

In American society, men are so often the breadwinners and the macho type. Showing off something a man normally does with a woman doing it should subconsciously prod at men, which is exactly what I thought Cub Cadet was trying to do within this seemingly innocent commercial.

The Ugliness of Fans

In tandem with my most recent post about the fans of sports dictating the magnitude of future athletes coming out as gay, I anticipate some questions arising. In my last post, I stated how I believe fans can sway an athletes decision to declare sexual orientation if negative. Where I believe some might disagree with me, is the common "they would never do that." In fact, some fans do. Which is why there is reason to worry.

On the account of race, some fans around the world have been outspokenly racist. The worst part, is that it is during the games in which they are racist. During the game is when a player should be worrying about the game itself and not feel threatened due to the color of his skin, or in this more recent case, his sexual orientation. Nevertheless, fans continue to defy acceptance, instead comparing black players to monkeys.

This was a banner displayed at a Russian soccer game in response to the acquisition of a black player. Clearly displayed in the middle of the banner is a banana, relating the newly acquired black player to a monkey. 

Even in this image, a fan is striking a monkey pose, directed at the black player in the image. These hate crimes cannot keep occurring. Not only does it make black players feel, without a question of a doubt, unsafe, but it deters players from playing in those leagues all together due to fear. 

This is the fear that may decide whether or not many athletes declare as gay in major professional American sports. Given, these images were from overseas. Hopefully Americans are more tolerant when an active major professional athlete comes into their stadium. If they are treated like any other athlete should be while playing the game, the successes could be outstanding. If not though, it would be a true shame and a significant blemish on the tolerance and acceptance of America. 

Are American fans different from those overseas? What do you think will happen when a rostered player comes out as gay and plays in front of opposing fans?

Lying in the Hands of the Fans

An NBA player announced he was gay today. In fact, this marks the first time that an active American major professional sports figure has announced his affinity for the same sex. Jason Collins, an NBA veteran Center declared it today. For more on his decision click here. 

Jason Collins

His decision is truly monumental. Not only will it provide comfort for other athletes to come out, but also many other people around the country. Because professional athletes have such a widespread influence on fans, seeing that an idolized figure, especially in something so masculine as sports, can come out and still lead a successful, professional career, will undoubtedly provide comfort. 

In fact, there is a current NFL player considering coming out, but, according to CBS reporter Mike Freeman, is "holding back out of fear of homophobic fan reaction." This fear is a very valid concern. Jason Collins is a free agent right now, meaning he isn't on an NBA roster at the moment, but is still considered an active player. Because he doesn't play for a team, he won't need to endure possible denigratory insults hurled his way. This is a whole different story for the NFL player. The NFL is currently rostered and would need to play amongst fans (especially when playing at another teams stadium with their fans) who may not be in approval of such a decision. Fan reaction may in fact decide the breadth of athletes coming out. If the unknown NFL player were to come out and receive intense hostility over his sexual orientation, then other players would, with reason, hesitate to come out. If greeted with acceptance, the perennial flood gates would certainly open. 

I hope for the sake of hesitant athletes and fans around the country, questioning whether to come out as gay, that fans accept outspoken athletes identified as gay. For that reception may have more significance than imaginable. 

What do you think the fans reaction to an active, gay athlete would be? What would subsequently occur in either case? Let me know with your comments!

The College Student: A Lopsided Treatment

In continuation of my last post over the Auburn football team getting illegal grade changes to comply with NCAA regulations of maintaining a 2.3 Grade Point Average to be eligible to compete in college football games, I couldn't help but think about the students of universities. I'm talking about the students, not the student-athletes. In my opinion, one of the most glaring reasons to not pay student-athletes for playing, are the students of various universities.

Most athletes of universities receive some form of scholarship to play sports at the university they attend. Even if they don't, they still have incredible benefits normal students could only dream about. As Paul Daugherty, a former professor at the University of Cincinnati noted in one of his courses he taught, "[his students] were not people who asked to be paid to attend college. These were folks who paid for the privilege" (Daugherty). 

Cheesman-Day & Newberger Study

Daugherty mentions some really important points in this passage. The most glaring in my opinion though, is stating how college is a "privilege". College is a privilege. I'm sure tons of people across the country would love to attend college, but simply cannot afford it. I will be able to go to college, which I feel is a huge privilege. In fact,  I could never imagine demanding money to receive a college education in the process. Receiving a free or discounted education is more than enough reciprocity for playing a sport. A sport in which the athlete most likely loves to do. 

To further bolster the point about a college education being a fine mode of reciprocity, a Cheesman-Day & Newberger study showed that individuals who received a degree from a university averaged over $1 million more over their lifetimes versus those who didn't. That's more than enough in my opinion. And to receive such an opportunity at a discounted price (what most athletes get) is incredible. Daugherty also stated that a lot of students leave school with a "five-figure yoke around [their] necks" (Daugherty). 

The students of universities are paying top-dollar for the privilege of attending a university. In hopes, they can receive a degree and better themselves for their lives ahead. College athletes are getting the same education, the majority of which are receiving it at a discounted price, and are now asking to be paid on top of such a privilege. Through the research I have conducted, I render it ridiculous. 

What do you think about this? Do you think a college education is an effective enough mode of reciprocity for student-athletes? Please let me know your thoughts!

Do Academics Matter?

Almost directly on cue with my research over collegiate athletes getting paid, the Auburn football program has recently come under fire about violating NCAA policies. The most glaring violation was changing grades of players to maintain their eligibility. For a more detailed report on the allegations, follow this link. Once hearing this, I immediately related it to the research I have been conducting for my junior theme.

The term "student-athlete" is heard everywhere, but it's starting to seem to me that coaches, fans and universities alike care more about the "athlete" part of that term a whole lot more. Bruce K. Johnson, an economics of sports professor wisely stated, "If a player reads like a fifth-grader but leads his team to the Rose Bowl, neither coaches nor fans will object. But at most athletic-powerhouses, if a coach bragged that his losing squad enjoyed a 100% graduation rate, fans would call for -- and likely get -- his head" (Johnson). 

NCAA Ad-Campaign for a 2.3 GPA

I found this to be right on par with Auburn's ideals. Fans truly would care if Auburn "enjoyed a 100% graduation rate". They only care about winning championships. In order to win championships, the Auburn players needed to be eligible to compete, and NCAA rules call for a 2.3 Grade Point Average to be eligible to participate in athletics. Based on the Auburn allegations, grades were altered to comply with such NCAA requirements. 

Such actions really made me think about the ideals of large American universities such as Auburn. Does academic integrity really matter to them? Or is it all about pleasing their fans, illegally putting an ineligible team on the football field?

Do you think athletic-powerhouse universities really care about academic integrity if it's at the cost of the team they put on the field? Please share your thoughts!

A Popular Distraction

Over the next two days, the NCAA March Madness College Basketball tournament will begin with it's opening round games. Historically, these games are the most riveting, as the most games are played in the shortest amount of time. In addition, the sheer number of upsets (lower seed beating a higher seed) increases as well, keeping viewers on the edge of their seat.

Even if someone isn't particularly a fan of the 68 teams in the tournament, there is a whole other side to the March Madness season-ending tournament that guarantees excitement: betting. And betting lots for that matter. RJ Bell of Pregame.com, March Madness betting in 2012 totaled 12 billion dollars, versus 10 billion dollars for the next biggest event, say, the Super Bowl! For more on the topic, check out this Forbes article.

"Boss Button" Option

What shocked me the most, is that sports have enveloped the workplace. It was estimated by a Challenger, Gray & Christmas of Chicago survey that decreased productivity in the workplace during these next two days will result in at least $134 million dollars lost of work not performed. In tandem, an estimated 3 million workers average 1-3 hours of watching the games instead of working. CBS Sports offers free viewing of the games on their website, which includes a "boss button" to cover up the games  with a fake email account if one's boss walks by while they are watching the games on the job.

These numbers and are staggering. It's ridiculous to know that Americans value sports enough to let it disrupt their professions. It truly shows how deeply rooted sports are in the American culture. Costing various companies a total of over a hundred million dollars just to watch college basketball games. I'm not saying I don't enjoy watching them, but know the time and place to do so.

A Politically Perfect Bracket

As is now tradition with President Obama, he fills out a bracket before each March Madness tournament begins. When watching this years selection of his, I couldn't help but wonder if there were underlying politics within his picks.

64 teams make the tournament and are placed in 4 different regions, where they are given seedings of 1-16. So, there are 4 one seeds (best overall) through 4 sixteen seeds.

When filling out a bracket, one has to determine who they think will win each matchup of the NCAA March Madness tournament, striving for perfection. Within every bracket, there are certain "upsets" which may take place, which the creator has to consider picking. "Upsets" are when a lower seeded team beats a higher seeded team in which they are playing against. Upsets are risky, but can yield high rewards if correct, as not many people choose them.

For the President of the United States, choosing an upset may be considered radical (due to the scarcity of being chosen), though free-thinking, which is why he must find a balance between the two when making his bracket.

In other words, I feel that President Obama may be voicing his ideals through his bracket. He chooses a few "upsets" to show his free-thinking and innovativeness, while sticking with the best overall teams in tandem. This balance, in my opinion, actually makes a lot of sense for his political sake. Showing both sides of his mindset, all within a seemingly harmless bracket.

A Dangerous Rule Change?

As discussions continue about possible NFL rule changes, one (commissioner proposed) rule change may be jeopardizing players further.

The proposed rule change would penalize running backs for lowering their heads to initiate contact with an oncoming defender. Although for the safety of defenders, the proposed change may actually put running backs in further danger. As seen with the image on the right, the running back is lowering his head to initiate contact with the defender, this results in an imminent head to head collision, which can injure the defender, as the running back normally has built up more speed than the defender on the run. 

If this were to be made illegal though, defenders would still be able to lower their shoulders into a hit, but the running back would now have his head up, meaning a potentially malicious hit on the running back. These occurrences would undoubtedly lead to more brain injuries for running backs, which is certainly not the intentions of the NFL. 

Outcry from running backs have been immediate. Matt Forte, the Chicago Bears running back, called the proposed rule change "absurd". 

Changes surely need to be made to improve the safety of the NFL, but not ones that could inadvertently injure players further.

What do you think about this proposed rule change? Should it pass in your mind?

More Than a Game

DiPietro looking at taunting fans

Rick DiPietro, a failed goaltender for the New York Islanders NHL hockey team, revealed something truly eye-opening for fans across the country of all sports.

In 2006, the Islanders signed DiPietro to a previously unseen 15-year, 67.5 million dollar contract. It turned out to be a complete mistake. Less than half-way through the deal (7 years to be exact) DiPietro's struggles compiled so incredibly that the team was better-off without him manning their nets. A colossal financial mistake, but one that had to be done for the sake of the team.

How bad was he? He allowed an average of 4.10 goals per game. To put that into perspective, the average goals allowed per game is 2.67 goals per game. In other words, he played horribly.

What was the most eye-opening in my opinion though, was the fact that DiPietro admitted to struggling with depression while on the Islanders. Once hearing this, I really started to put sports into perspective. Sure, these athletes are paid unearthly amounts of money to play games, but they are human beings at the end of the day. Although they may show a strong outer shell during games, they have emotions just like you and I have, which must be respected regardless of their play.

Americans in general I feel struggle with grasping the fact that athletes are simply humans and must be respected. I for one get caught up in the moment during sports games and jeer my hometown athletes when they struggle, but never would have thought that it could have such profound effects on them. Depression is serious, as I would never have thought that playing a sport one loves could result in a mental disorder. Americans need to change this mentality to allow the widespread enjoyment for all athletes. The last thing they need is to worry about disorders forced upon by fans versus that of other athletes within their respective games.

Do you find this surprising? Have you ever possibly contributed to this problem? Let me know your thoughts!

Just a Color?

In tandem with the ongoing in class talks about the biased incarcerations of blacks versus whites, the simple "color" problem is really persisting. 

From a New York Times article surprisingly about the drop in percentages of blacks versus whites incarceration, a glaring number still stood out to me. "Over all, blacks currently make up about 38 percent of inmates in state and federal prisons; whites account for about 34 percent."

Keep those numbers in mind:

38% Black
34% White

Based on the United States Census, the racial percentages are as follows:

13.1% Black
78.1% White

Why the disparity in percentages?

I feel that a sort of hard-wiring has overtaken American ideals over the years. Aside from the most affluent black people in the USA such as Oprah, Obama, athletes and countless others, it seems that a common misconception of seeing a group of black men on the street versus white men on the street is made constantly. A group of black men could symbolize a gang meeting, which leads to the stops and incarcerations in conjunction. A group of white men wouldn't make a police officer think twice.

Whether or not that can or will change is anyone's guess, but I would love to hear your thoughts about why you think the numbers of incarceration vs. population are such opposites. Do you think the color of one's skin correlates to assumptions and incarcerations?

How Good Do We Have it?

Orma Men on Village Patrol

         Currently in Kenya, upcoming elections have stirred incredible violence between neighboring clans. The Orma and Pokomo ethnic groups are resorting to physical violence in support of their political leaders. As this New York Times article states, "ethnically based militias are mobilized, and neighbors start killing neighbors." Neighbors are killing each other. Under no circumstances could I ever visualize my neighbors killing each other. Regardless of ethnicity or political preferences, such actions shouldn't ever occur.

         Once seeing these atrocities in Kenya, it really opened my eyes to how wonderful elections are in the United States. Never would I think that widespread death would ever occur as a result of an American election. Sure, with opinion clashes comes disagreement and insults, but not to the magnitude like what's transpiring in Kenya currently.

Voters Voting

         I know that my neighbors have different political affiliation than my family, but something that petty I feel would never spark violence between us. For that reason, I feel truly proud to live in this current peaceful Democracy. Even if one's preferred candidate doesn't win the election within the United States, violence is really never an option, which is beautiful in comparison to Kenya. 

As seen in the picture at left, these Americans are most likely voting for different candidates, but violence isn't in the cards like it will be for Kenyans. It's a beautiful thing. 

Branch Rickey Changed the World

Jackie Robinson

           Today marks what would have been Jackie Robinson's 94th Birthday. For those who may not know Jackie Robinson, he was the first African-American professional baseball player. He broke a seemingly insurmountable color barrier at the time and opened the door for other athletes of color to follow in his footsteps. It seems as though most people know of Jackie Robinson, but not many people know of the man who signed him to the Brooklyn Dodgers roster: Branch Rickey.

Rickey signing Robinson

            In my opinion, without Branch Rickey, the extensive world of sports in which us Americans embrace so greatly would simply not be close to what it is. At the time,  "any links with blacks would mark [baseball] as beyond the pale. Moreover, from the Jim Crow era down to the 1930s it would probably have been impossible to have integrated a Major League team without inspiring a violent backlash, even in many northern cities, and no one was willing to take the risk," (Jackie Robinson and the Integration of Baseball). 

          
         Out of fear, baseball stayed segregated, until Branch Rickey's signing. Without his incredibly brave decision, who is to predict what kind of sports world we would embrace today? I find it an incredible American ideal to stick to the social norm and not step outside of one's boundaries. As shown though with Rickey's signing of Jackie Robinson, bravery can have incredible benefits for everyone. In this case, changing not only baseball, but the world of sports forever while providing a foundation of racial equality to be built on up until today. 

         What do you think the sports world would be like without Branch Rickey? Comment below with your thoughts!

A Domesticated Killer

       A study done by Nature.com has just opened my eyes to an unseen and widely disregarded problem. Cats are causing more deaths of birds and mammals each year than all other human causes.

Cat after killing rabbit

The estimated numbers are:

1.4-3.7 billion birds killed each year
6.9-20.7 billion mammals killed each year

According to Nautre.com, "Our findings suggest that free-ranging cats likely the single greatest source of anthropogenic mortality for US birds and mammals". 

This new discovery is truly staggering. Although stated that the majority of the cats are un-owned, a significant percentage is still from the exact domesticated cats that owners across the nation have come to love. Cat owners may argue that it's just the nature of their cats, but that's truly insensitive in regards to the widespread deaths they are causing for really no reason. Cats of all shapes, sizes and domestication are contributing to the tens of billions of deaths annually.

I think though that it is an incredible American value to disregard such findings. For Americans, (me included with my dog) we think that our pets could never be the brunt of atrocities. Cat owners included may think that their cat can't possibly be the cause of such deaths. They're wrong. Instead of just disregarding such findings, Americans need to become more aware of occurrences around them, like their pets killing more birds and mammals than themselves each year.

What do you think? Do Americans have a problem of disregarding information possibly pertaining to themselves? Any personal experiences? Please share in the comments!

Final Exam, Racial Equality: A Long Time Coming

"Cheers" taken by Pete Souza

           The “Beer Summit Picture” is an important contemporary American artifact because it represents the incredible growth and current status of the United States of America, striving to achieve racial equality. It relates to our class because it compares current racial equality to inequality shown in the Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Glory and even theatrical productions. In the picture, taken by official white house photographer Pete Souza, there are three men, Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., Police Sergeant James Crowley and President Barack Obama. Souza decided to make the background dark, focusing all attention on the men at the table. More importantly though, is the theme of equality. All three men share equal thirds of the picture, showing a perfect division of space and power. In addition, they all are uniting their beverages in the middle of the table, coming together as a sign of mutual respect for one another. Such equality and respect is expressed and embraced in today’s America, although it wasn’t at all the case just over a century and a half ago.

            In The Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, Frederick Douglass realized the racial inequality occurring with his observation, “There were horses and men, cattle and women, pigs and children, all holding the same rank in the scale of being, and were all subjected to the same narrow examination” (51). This statement truly portrays the horrible inequality occurring in the early 19th century. Other human beings were being ranked and treated like horses, cattle and pigs. White men did the ranking. The people being ranked among the animals were black.

            Also in the film, Glory, Denzel Washington’s character, Trip, made another important realization of racial inequality occurring. When speaking with Colonel Shaw, the leader of the all-black 54th Regiment Massachusetts Infantry, he proclaimed, “What about us, what do we get?” comparing the life of Colonel Shaw (a white man) upon return home versus the lives of himself and the rest of the all black infantry. Wary of the fact that they were risking their lives on the battlefield for the Union army though weren’t going to be treated equally with the white men doing the same.

Play Advertisement

            Finally, even theatrical productions in the early 20th century were incredibly degrading to African-Americans, blatantly spelling out the ideals of racial inequality. As found on spirobolos.com through Mr. Bolos’ Delicious page Racism and the Undercaste, an incredible display of racial inequality can be seen through an advertisement for a relatively popular play at the time. The feature of the advertisement shows two pictures of seemingly different actors involved in the play, however they are the same person. The portrait on the left shows a white man with, as Mr. Bolos put it, “dignity”. His hair is combed and parted, his body language appears confident, with a slight grin. His chin is up and overall seems extremely well put together. As for the image on the right, the same actor is now in complete blackface, with glaring red lipstick, unkempt hair and a truly crazed expression. His eyes are wide open and a look of sheer terror is shown on his face. The stark contrast of the appearances of the same actor in different costumes, the dignified white versus the crazed black, truly shows the extreme ideals and practices of racial inequality merely a century ago.

           In conclusion, the “Beer Summit” picture shows the current racial equality in American society, as three men, two black and one white, can now share a beer in harmony; although as we have seen throughout this first semester of American Studies, it has been a long time coming for blacks in America trying to achieve racial equality.

Show Me The Money!

While watching a Christmas special of the popular television show, Duck Dynasty- a reality show about the hilarious and unorthodox family behind a duck hunting company (for those who don't know the show, an overview can be seen through this link) - something really spoke to me about american ideals.

The character, Si

The company threw a holiday party for local children, with the CEO of the company, Willie, playing Santa Claus while the always entertaining and unpredictable uncle and employee of Willie named "Si" being Santa's helper. When one little girl was asked by Willie what she wanted for Christmas, she replied that she wanted art supplies because she wanted to be an artist. Si sharply butted in by saying that there isn't any money to be made in the art profession.



I feel that the point he made was incredibly applicable to american ideals of occupations. It's all about where the money is. It's heard so incredibly often the terms of people having "good" or "bad" jobs. Just as we have discussed in class, "good" and "bad" by no means reflect the quality of the person performing the jobs or even quality of work, just the job's pay. Personally, I've heard it and seen it time and time again the obsession with one's income. For example, extremely reputable and widely subscribed to Forbes magazine releases the annually anticipated "Forbes 400" list. This list profiles the 400 wealthiest Americans for all subscribes to revere in their wealthy aura. The "list" speaks wonders about american ideals.

It's somewhat eye-opening that one's occupation in the american culture is viewed upon based on the money that they make and not the quality or purpose of the work.

What do you think about American values of one's occupations purpose? How can media change this ideal? Please let me know your thoughts!