Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Gender

Over time society has decided that masculinity and femininity, are not only things that exist, but that it is abnormal for them to coexist within one person. You can either be masculine or feminine. Sure we acknowledge that a man can have some feminine qualities and that a woman could have masculine qualities, but it is rare for society to then not look at those people and make a judgment on whether that person is gay or straight.

In reality, nothing is made masculine or made feminine. Society makes a judgment based off of what it is, as to if it is masculine or feminine. In doing so society has created two boxes and everyone is expecting to either fit in one or the other. If a person is born a boy then they are expected to be in the masculine box. If a person is born a girl then they are expected to be in the feminine box. If either a guy or a girl is caught outside their respective box, possibly reaching towards the other, then they are harassed by society until they return to their "appropriate" box. When in actuality, there is no "appropriate" box. It is impossible to think that every guy is going to be the exact same or every girl is going to be exactly the same. I have known many guys throughout my lifetime who don't like sports, which society has generally attributed to be a masculine thing, and I have known girls who do. What ends up happening when society sees a man acting feminine or a woman acting masculine, they make the judgment person is a homosexual. Whether or not the person actually ends up being gay or lesbian is irrelevant when society judges them for it based off of a social construction such as masculinity and femininity.  

Masculinity is the ideology of men having to think and act a certain way in order for them to be a proper man. For example, growing up in my life I have rarely seen my father cry. When something sad happens I am more likely to see my mother cry than my father. This is most likely due to the idea that men cannot show their emotions because if they do, then they are less of a man. In fact, the only real emotion a man is supposed to show is anger or aggression. In the Kimmel reading, he talks about how a man is truly judged by his willingness to get into a fight. A man is expected to be willing to drop everything and defend his honor by engaging in physical contact with another man, mainly to show his dominance. I could account more times in my life of my father being angry than I could of him being sad. He has told me that it was just the way he was raised and that he learned from watching his father. This doesn't mean that my father has never felt sad, or any man has never felt sad, it is just normally accepted that men don't show that emotion. If a man did happen to show sadness, their society could look at them and think that they are acting feminine. Sadness isn't a feminine reaction, rather it is a human one.


Femininity is seen as the weaker of the two. If you saw two people, one being physically strong and angry and the other being not as physically strong and they were crying, generally society would look at the crying one has feminine. It is partially due to this way of thinking that a guy or girl, who shows any form of emotion is looked at as weak. In the like a girl commercial when people were asked to do things like a girl, they responded with an over exaggerated response. It is assumed that all girls are always showing their emotions in every single movement they make. This leads to society labeling someone who shows their emotions as being feminine because it has become generally accepted by our culture that a "true" girl shows their emotions and a "true" guy doesn't. 


There is no such thing as a true guy or girl though because every single person is different and has been raised differently. If a boy or girl was raised in a more open household he might be more common to show his emotions than per say a boy or girl that was raised in a household where showing their emotions was frowned upon. In the end no matter how a guy or girl acts should be accepted by their society, not because they are acting masculine or feminine, but because they are acting like their true selves.   



Thursday, February 9, 2017

Post #2

Social Construction of Reality: This is when society impacts on how something is viewed. The example I like to use is how earbuds have taken on an entirely new meaning in today's society. Earbuds were made so that people could listen to music without disrupting the environment around them. However now if a person has both headphones in, then they don't want to talk to anybody and they are removing themselves from the situation they are in. This is a Social Construction of Reality because earbuds inherently have no meaning, but our society has given them one.

Macro Sociology: Is the study of how large groups of individuals impact an individual. For example, a macro group would be high school students. Now I as individual feels the need to go to college because most high school students go to college. Of course, I also would like to get a higher education, but the idea of me going to college was in everyone's mind because it is generally excepted that I would go to college.

Micro-Sociology: This is the study of how smaller groups impact an individual. For instance, my family would be a micro group. In my family, it is expected of my to go to college because both of my parents didn't, so it's expected of me to do what they couldn't.

Research Methods: The two types of research most commonly used in sociology are qualitative and quantitative studies. Qualitative data is gathered mostly through nonnumerical methods like free response questions and just by observing the people you are surrounded by. Quantitative is data collected through numbers and statistics. In "Gang Leader for a Day" the main character starts out by asking the Black Kings gang questions that are quantitative. They didn't allow for the people he was interviewing to answer or even want to answer because they all were multiple choice questions. He later realizes that if he is going to discover anything about those people that he would have to change his approach. He then stops asking them questions and simply hangs out around them. This is qualitative research at it's finest. He was able to really learn about the guys he was with because they were able to be themselves without becoming a number.

Ingroups/Outgroups: An ingroup is a group that you are a part of. For instance, I am part of my group of friends. I feel comfortable around them because I am a part of that group. On the other hand, though there are outgroups. Outgroups are groups that you aren't a part of and since you aren't a part of that group, it becomes easier to judge people who are from that group. After learning the idea I started to keep a look out for anytime I made a judgment about an outgroup. Then one day during lunch I noticed myself making a joke with my friends about these kids that took our lunch table. Even though my friends and I sit there every day, that still isn't a good enough reason for me to start making assumptions about this group. It was just easy for me to do so because I wasn't in that group and the group I was in were making those assumptions.

Generalizations and Stereotypes: Generalizations are beneficial to society. As long as they are based on facts and evidence collected through thoughtful studies then they can really help researchers make assumptions about certain groups of people that could explain their behavior. Generalizations can be risky, however. There is a very fine line between generalizations and stereotypes. A stereotype is an assumption made about a person or certain group of people that isn't supported factually and is just an ignorant idea. Stereotypes can stem from generalizations because someone could look at a person and see a factual generalization about them and then make the connection that because they are part of this generalization then that means they are so on and so forth. For example, you could have a generalization that is supported by factual evidence like, most Stevenson students are middle to upper middle class. The stereotype would be to look at an individual and say because they go to Stevenson then that means they are wealthy. This is not the case because you cannot make an assumption about an individual just because they are associated with a certain group.


Wednesday, February 1, 2017

Qualitative vs. Quantitative

In the study done by Chapman University, they set out to support the claim the death from terrorist attacks is scarier than deaths from guns. In order to support this claim, the University did a quantitative study of fears where the asked 1,500 Americans what they feared most. The results were pretty surprising in my opinion as 41% said that they feared terrorist attacks. Now that alone isn't very shocking seeing as how America has had to go through such attacks as 9/11. However when you look at the numbers and find that the only fear Americans have towards guns, is the fear that the government will take them away. 38.5%  said they fear gun control the most, even though guns are 3,210 times more likely to kill them than terrorist attacks. In order to explain these numbers, Chapman University turned to a qualitative study in which they observed what contributed to this fear. They came up with that the coverage by the media has a huge impact on the way the public views terrorism. They talk about how the wide blanket coverage of the 9/11 attacks seared an image of terrorism into the public's mind. Compared to the mass and individual shootings that get little to no coverage. I think that the quantitative information gathered helped the University support their claim that deaths from terrorist attacks are scarier than deaths from guns. The overwhelming response of the public of what they are afraid of clearly supports their claim.

I find the results of this study to be concerning, but not surprising. I like to think that I am a pretty up to date person. I watch the news a lot and like to stay informed by reading articles. The most talked about thing in the news has always been terrorism since I have been able to keep up with the news. Even though shootings happen more often, especially in Chicago, people still fear terrorism more. I don't agree that deaths from terrorist attacks are scarier than deaths from guns because being the high school student that I am, it is hard to ignore what seems to be regularly scheduled school shootings. In our day in age, with the technology and information that we have, it is easier to protect against a terrorist attack. Mostly because after 9/11, America really cracked down on National Security. When it comes to shootings, however, they are more personalized. Most of the time they don't have to do with someone doing it on behalf of a cause, but rather doing it because they have reached their breaking point. My personal opinion is that deaths from guns are scarier than deaths from terrorist attacks because they are so much more deaths from guns than there are deaths from terrorist attacks.

Question: What factors contribute to the course that a student chooses to take at Stevenson High School?

5 Quantitative Questions:
1) How many college prep courses have you selected?
2) How many accelerated courses have you selected?
3) How many AP course have you selected?
4) Are you involved in any outside of school activities? (sports, clubs, volunteering, etc.)
5) How important is academics to you? answer choices- unimportant, somewhat important, neutral, important, very important.

3 Qualitative Strategies:
1) Observe the way my friends handle their school work. Whether it be that they really care about getting work done on time, or the put it off to the last minute, or even not doing it at all.
2) Observe how the students parents react to their performance in school.
3) Ask the student what they plan on doing in their future and if they even have a plan?

The study would mainly focus on the factors that contribute to a student selecting courses at Stevenson. It is interesting to think about why a student picks the courses that they do. Are they interested in a certain field? Or are they simply picking whatever class they think would be easiest? The quantitative questions that we have presented would help us get an idea of the courses that the majority of students select. From there, we can turn to our qualitative questions to try and figure out why that student picked those courses. The combination of both quantitative and qualitative research should be able to let us inside a students mind and really find an answer to the question, Why did you pick that course?