Sunday, May 23, 2010

HW 58-Parenting 102

Part 3:
Key points from Ms. Plaza:
  • Lots of support is important
  • Breast-feeding is important
  • Parent-child relationships are dysfunctional, it's a one way relationship with the parent and the child's beck and call
  • Father and mother figures are important even if they're not the biological parents
  • Children inherit parents baggage
  • It's perfect healthy if you don't have kids. It's better than forcing yourself to have them when you don't want them
Key points from Mr. Marks:
  • Coaching approach of teaching is preferred (For him)
  • Giving them a lot of structures and activities as a child gives kids a head start
  • Strengthen your strengths when it comes to the child
  • Unstructured play and natural learning is healthier but does not guarantee mainstream success. This is more common amongst the working and middle class
Key points from my dad:
  • Protecting your child and making sure they're safe
  • Teaching a good sense of morals
  • Being civil minded and helpful
  • Making sure the child is happy and innocent so they see the good in life (Optimism)
  • Structure is important so that kids have a foundation to build off of
  • Rules, kids like to follow rules
Analysis:
Out of the parents interviewed, the general consensus was that children need to be given free reign over their life, however they do need to be pushed in the right direction every now and then. Early childhood is unanimously important for both the parents and the child, as this is when the mother is at her weakest and the child their most malleable, so a strong structure must be provided to ensure that both parties survive and thrive.
In childhood though, a parent has to make sure that their own flaws do not come out in their child, as children carry their parents baggage but instead they should take the opportunity to strengthen theirs own strengths in the child so that they will perform even better. In addition, structure is important here, to establish that they will have a civilized child who will be able to adhere to society well. These statements and beliefs in raising children lead to the conclusion that these will lead to a continuing society as it currently stands.
Part 4:
Will Smith once released a song called Parents Just Don't Understand. In it he said the following: "You know parents are the same, no matter time nor place they just don't understand that us kids are going to make some mistakes. So to all you other kids across the land, there's no need to argue. Parents just don't understand." On that note, parents don't see things through the eyes of a child and they shouldn't. Parents often do understand, sorry Will, but they overlook the wants of the child to give them what they need. On this note, it turns out that the Rolling Stones were right, you can't always get what you want, but if you try sometimes you might find you get what you need. That's what parents are here for, to give kids what they need to succeed and be happy.

Monday, May 17, 2010

HW 57-Parenting 101

*For the record, I would like to say, I may rant and/or run off topic during this assignment because parents are a big topic for me, going from how to parent to the ways that modern day parents are wrong.*


Parents are the mold for the future. They take the clay that is children and they shape it in whatever way they think is best in order to create what they hope is a work of art. However, in most cases a work of art is nowhere to be found and it is only after the clay break that something of value can be found. In short, parents are doing their job wrong.
Now, let me go on the record as saying I love kids. I had a great childhood and I always wanted a little sibling one day and to eventually get married and have kids of my own. As a result, I don't think that all parents are horrible. It just seems to me that parents these days forgot what it was like to be kids and treat their children too much like an investment or an ice sculpture.
Many parents in my experience interning at my former elementary school were widely unaware of their children's life outside of their care. It was almost as if they only remembered they even had kids when they could see them. For instance, parents were unaware of what class or afterschool program their kids were in nine out of ten times. Even upon seeing theire kids at the end of the day and picking them up, they rarely said "Hi sweety, how was your day?" but you always hear "Come on, we're going home. Get going". While this doesn't mean or suggest that the parents don't ask it later, it does display the need parents seem to have to be in control of the situation and try and live through their kids instead of with their kids as friends.
Another thing that parents seem to forget is that kids have energy. Kids like to run, to play. They enjoy running around. Instead, since their children are investments to them, they don't want it to leave their sight, they have to constantly observe every action and make sure that their is no risk. However, with all good investments, you turn the best profit when there is the greatest risk. By hovering over your kids to make sure they don't do so much as scrape their knee, the investment, aka the child, becomes unable to sustain itself. This type of parenting is called helicopter parenting, and it's despicable and leads to weaker and more insecure children who know of nothing without their parents.
Now this may sound biased, but I truly feel that in most cases my parents were ideal. They were always there for me when I needed them, but they knew when I was capable of watching myself and would even just let me run around in the neighborhood alone with my friends as long as I checked in every now and then. I feel like this balance of independence and guidance was crucial in stabilizing my core and making me self-sufficient. In addition to this, there was a relatively consistent routine in my household, however there was always room for change, making it somewhat flexible, giving me a sense of control and never allowing me to feel caged in. While I did afterschool and spent a lot of time away from home and "mommy and daddy's watch", my parents would come on school trips as chaperones to balance it out. Every element of my childhood that I feel was successful was created through a sense of balance, having a lenient and a strict parent, having independence but knowing limits and having a guide.
Maybe if parents could take their noses out of the latest parenting book and spend time with their kids they would acquire such a sense of balance, but until then they will complain about the very things they buy their own children when they could just say no.
Sorry for rambling, but parents need to get their act together.

Sunday, May 16, 2010

HW 56- Interviews and Survey Question

Part 1:
Q1: How did you meet your best friend?
Q2: How long have you known your best friend?
Q3: Have you lost touch with any close friends?
Q4: How did you meet that friend?
Q5: How long were you friends?

Part 2:
Interview 1: Mr Z
Q1: High school chemistry class.
Q2: 10 years roughly.
Q3: Yes, totally.
Q4: High school as well, same class even.
Q5: 8 years.
Interview 2: My friend (17 year old boy)
Q1: From school.
Q2: 4 years.
Q3:Yes.
Q4: School as well, middle school though.
Q5: Three years roughly.
Interview 3: My friend (18 year old boy)
Q1: After school program at my elementary school. We both did something like dance or music, I can't really remember. We hated each other but then eventually we became best friends over the years.
Q2: Well, going with that same friend, almost 13 years now.
Q3: Yea, but not too many.
Q4: Sleepaway camp.
Q5: About a month, we lost touch pretty quick.
Part 3:
In most cases, people seem to group well with those that they went through a developmental period with. For example, with Mr. Z, his closest friends came from high school, a period of time in which most people are formulating their identity and becoming who they will be for the rest of their life. As a result, they may form very much into the same or similar people, and therefore get along better because it's more like talking to a slightly different version of themselves. For my friend who is 18, the bond formed from elementary school based after-school programs, a branch of the institution of school. Therefore, these interviews show that people forced into institutions at a developmental period form closer, long-lasting bonds.

Part 4:
Do institutions create closer bonds?

Thursday, May 13, 2010

HW 55-

Part 1:
What separates friends and acquaintances and what makes them become the other?

Part 2:
Maggie- I think that while your question is good, you should make it slightly more narrow, possibly by focusing on either social or emotional instead of both. This would cut your work down in half. In addition, you can make the target range smaller, focusing on particular groups of people we see every day like co-workers, fellow students, etc.
Rachel- Rachel, I feel like you have a great jumping off point for a question, but you can make it much more specific, or at least focus on certain aspects of it. You could focus on personality tests, compatibility tests, and even shared interests and then focus on these shared aspects in relationships that have started online and offline, and see how important these were in the long term.

Part 3:

Monday, May 10, 2010

HW 54-

Part 1:
I find the results of this test to be relatively useless on their own. Granted, it's a nice insight into ones being, but without a written analysis of one self or more in depth response, the results just kind of sit there, momentarily making you think before you forget them to go check your facebook.
That being said, after reviewing a more thorough analysis of what these traits say about ourselves in class, I think that a level of self analysis can be accomplished in which one looks inward and understands their actions better. However, since this is based on our answers about what we think , the legitimacy of the answers can be questioned, but then we can also learn to see ourselves more accurately if compared with a test that reveals or actual actions and thoughts on these courses of events.
Part 2:
The test seems to be pretty reliable in most cases. While some people in class did disagree with their results, most people in the class would then agree with the results, showing that they are in fact quite valid. With my own results, upon reviewing what they said about me in detail, I would agree that this test is mostly accurate. The thing is, it is largely debatable because people might say that they would act one way and then act another. Also, a person might not find their results reliable because they don't like to look at themselves that way. These are simple problems that may arise very easily, however through these problems may also arise a better understanding of ones actual place in the world and how one acts. Overall, it is like a significantly more accurate horoscope, it could turn out to be total baloney but at the same time it can actually be relevant and lead to a certain path.

Thursday, May 6, 2010

HW 53- Survey Analysis

Part 1:
Done
Part 2:
Taking the survey made me feel very good about myself and my home life. For a lot of the early questions I was able to answer in the more positive columns, which made me realize that even with various aspects of my life at difficult points, I still had developed healthy enough relationships with my parents and had grown to accept them well enough that I could be completely open with them and them with me and still feel comfortable. This held true with my friends as well, since I've had the same close friends for the majority of my life and they are the people I trust the most in my life. However with certain categories, such as the partnering questions, I took a second to stop and think not about the questions and my answers, but rather what this meant about me. Was I behind the curve? Ahead of it? It put me in a position where I stopped and thought about what these answers meant about me and if those answers made me happy. This was section made me question myself more than others because of what it reflected, but I was still happy and pleased that I was able to honestly provide the answers that I did because it showed that I had done right by my standards of living.
Part 3:
In terms of patterns, I noticed that for the last section, self, people tended to pick the "safe answers". By this I mean that on questions that were supposed to be deep and explore the inner sections of the minds, people went with the answer that society most commonly dictates. For instance, 45 out of 52 people said that they do not make others feel bad to make themselves feel good, when in fact I know this to be untrue, because I have witnessed it myself as people are unnecessarily rude and disrespectful of others for no reason and then they smile and/or look happy about themselves. While not necessarily a conscious decision at all times, it is something that people do sometimes without realizing it. However, since the safe answer is no, they say no, because they don't think about the times they have done so. This is societal pressure at it's strongest, where they don't answer truly honestly but don't even realize it, because society has conditioned them to think as society has told them, which is that it's wrong to take pleasure in other people's woes.
Part 4:
Using the first article as a comparison, our school is perfectly in line with the city average for having sex in high school, with 50% of our grade answering in the more affirmative categories on sexual encounters. However, in contrast to this, under 50% use protection of some sort, and 19 people requested not to answer at all. While this could be in reference to not having sexual experiences, even if every single on of those votes went to the 14 kids who said they had no sexual encounters, there would still be leftover vote that said they didn't wish to answer, which could mean they don't use protection and are too ashamed to admit so. Using the second article as a comparison, our school also fell mostly in line with the averages. However, our school seemed to be below the curve in eating disorders. This can most likely be attributed to New York, while not perfect, being one of the healthier and more active cities in America. The way this study was conducted differentiated from ours though, as people had to write their answers out on paper, and it was scanned. This may have caused certain differences to arise based on subconscious concerns over somebody recognizing their hand-writing or something similar.

Sunday, May 2, 2010

HW 52- Initial Theories of Human Relationships

Initial Theories on:

Love: People fall in love for many reasons, or so they say. However, in reality this can largely break down to one reason that spreads to encompass many different types of relations. Nobody wants to be alone. The younger a person is, the more subconscious this reason is, however it is still present. Starting in middle school, crushes evolve from spending time with a person and seeing that you get along with them and enjoy being in their company. For the crushes people have on people they don't really know, they are often caused from seeing a person often with others and in a good or happy mood. While there are exceptions, these exceptions, such as having a crush on the quite kid, always stem from a sense of affinity for a person, which then relates back to belonging. From here, they evolve to high school "relationships" where people test the waters and try and see how well they can get along with an individual. However, standards in high school are often incredibly high to the point where the likelihood of success decreases significantly. Then comes college, where people either choose to dismiss the pursuit of permanent partners for the easier conquest of the temporary. The likelihood of those actually pursuing a permanent partner increase here, as people begin to grasp a better understanding of themselves and reasonable standards. After college, people grow and the rate of people falling in love increases as people get older for the rest of their lives, since there are less and less people to choose from as alternatives. However, as time passes standards lower and acceptance rates climb, to the point where people will fall in love with somebody as long as they get along.
This however is just a theory, and I'm not wholly sure of it myself, but it does make a large bit of sense to me. There is a lot of evidence to people choosing out of necessity for belonging rather than affinity (Although that does make the ability
to belong much stronger). Take for instance, The Walking Dead.

As this image shows, given a smaller selection, people may (Not definite, as it's impossible to truly prove this) just settle for anything, even if they don't truly know one another or connect. As time goes on, these two characters do fall in love, but does this love come from affinity or desperation for companionship? Are they the same?

Family: In many ways, family is just love taken to the next degree. If love is "I don't want to be alone", then family in many ways is "If you die and I'm alone, I have back-ups that are similar to us". This is a continuation of love obviously, but it also expands to not wanting to be forgotten, to having contributed to the world. You want people to see your family, specifically somebody you were instrumental in developing, and go "Hey, _____ raised you and made you who you are today". That is something that outlasts you and everything they do will be because of you. As this is extended, grandparents get credit for the actions of their grandkids, aunts and uncles to nephews and nieces, and so on. However, the further the connection, the less the credit, hence the urge for people to have a family of their own. "Their own", as in they own it and it's representative of them. In addition, family can help you feel better about yourself. If somebody gets fired from work or has a rough day, at the end of it all they can just say "Well, I have a wife and a kid, that's something." Family becomes a possession to them and an award of sorts, to show off. Plus, family is there to make you feel better, so after that long day that person's kid can show them the A they got on a test and their spouse can give them a home-cooked meal and console them. Does this mean that they are being selfish in having a family? Wouldn't it be selfless since they have to give to their family in order to make them happy? Are hermit's and single people with no relatives selfless then even though they give more to themselves directly?

Friends: Friendships form from many of the same origins as love and family relationships. Friends are essentially a more quantitative and often less qualitative form of love relationships. People make friends based on the affinity between them in most cases. That's why people take roommate surveys when getting ready for college, so that they may be placed with people that they are more likely to be friends with and so they have a common starting point to jump off of. However, in many situations, friends represent who, what, and where a person may want to be. If somebody knows that somebody is an actor for instance, they may be envious and try to use them as a jumping off point to their own success. Not every instance is like such, but the better the knowledge you gain from somebody before bonding with them the more likely that the relationship has some form of somebody using another for their own gain.

Roles: People form roles in relationships to try and capture a greater sense of belonging. These roles serve the purpose of artificial affinity in many ways. For instance, if somebody decides to take on the role of the "jock" amongst their friends, since there is already a "nerd" or a "player". These roles typically fall in line with a person's individual personality, however often times people will throw away their personality and identity when they have a severe need for belonging. This is when people are being "fake", another role one can fulfill, however being "fake" is a role nobody wants to fill. These roles form a connection within a group as every role serves an individual purpose and accomplishes different feats. That is why a group with all geek is not very well formed, as they will not have a jock to defend them of to keep them socially relevant. These roles are not always open for the taking, and even if so, not everybody can fit every role. Personality ties in as well, and this is when people develop feelings of inadequacy, as they do not belong because they naturally fill out the wrong roles within their groups.

Genders: People take on gender roles or fight gender roles largely for one reason; to make life easier. If one is to simply accept the gender role of say, a woman, then their life is simple, they only have to worry about maintaining that role, and to do so simply means staying on the path you have set yourself on. Cooking, cleaning, doing what your man says, it's simple. To fight a role is also simple, because you just don't do what the role entails. If you're a man and you don't want to follow your gender role than you don't drink beer, you don't play football, and so on. Making life simple can then make life easier and make you more likely to achieve other goals in life, by having set aside others by accepting the role.
However, the reasons that others force these roles upon others stems from many different origins. While some may do it to make things simpler, you can expect people to fulfill their role and that role is so imbedded in you by society that you don't have to worry about keeping track of things. Another reason people form gender expectations and force them upon others is because of their upbringing. If somebody grew up in an environment where the men brought home the money and the women cooked the food, they expect the same from others, since to them it's normal. They can then force these upon others without even realizing it, causing friction and stereotypes to evolve.

Races: Racism is people trying to group people together in larger collective instead of getting to know them on a personal level. These groupings are formed most frequently by race because it's a very superficial quality that is easily determined and then from there conclusions can be formed. Based on somebody of light skin criticizing one with darker skin, conclusions such as them being dirty or poor or un-pure are often the first to be made. These however also serve to cover up ones own insecurities and curiosities of race, as they show their limited knowledge and serve as an invitation for correction and learning. As a result, racism serves in many ways as a child pleading for help but afraid to say the word. They want to know more and they want help, but they are afraid that they will look weak if they ask for such.
Criminals: