Gender Neutral Children

                I personally have concerns about raising a child as gender neutral or genderless, like Storm. I just don't think there's enough data talking about the pros and cons for me to make a real stance on the topic, so I'm left with my opinion. While I agree that it's important for children to play with whatever toys they want or dress however they like, but completely ignoring the fact that gender exists doesn't seem positive for the child. Raising a gender neutral/genderless child is also not an easy task. To raise a child this way, the parents have to vary their tasks so that the child doesn't begin to pick up that mommy does these things while daddy does these things. To raise your child without outside influence of gender, the child would pretty much have to live in isolation; the child can't go to the store or they would get some sort of gender influence from other shoppers or the products around them. They couldn't go out and make friends, leaving the child unable to make social connections and develop properly socially. Even at holidays with family members, the family could possible slip and reveal something about gender identity and the child. It's near impossible to raise a child completely genderless or gender neutral while still maintaining proper social development. Also, if your child has no idea of gender and they go to school, they're going to be very confused about what the other boys and girls are wearing and how they're acting, in addition to not even being able to socialize with their peers since they never developed those skills. There is also possibility of the child being bullied since they're not like the other kids (http://www.parents.com/parenting/gender-neutral-parenting/).

                Marly Pierre-Louis attempted to raise her child as gender neutral, but she quickly learned that it was easier said than done. She had friends and family poking at her belly asking her baby boy to come out, often expressing how excited they were to "play sports" with the little "champ." As soon as their son was born she was bombarded with "boy" clothes from family and friends, clothes in shades of blues and greens with words like "sports," "champ," "superhero," "all-star," and things of that sort. She planned to balance the boys clothes with girls clothes, skirts and dresses or frilly things in pinks and purples. It turned out that a so called "progressive parent" as herself found it difficult to put her son into a dress. If he asked, she expressed that it was easier, but her putting her son in a dress was not as easy as she expected. Hey, she has years and years of expected gender norms weighing on her and her reputation as a good parent at stake. She found that gender-bending doesn’t have to be about making her son “dress like a girl,” but more about keeping his gender identity and worldview fluid and free of restrictions, leaving him able to dress as freely and enjoy what he chose  (http://www.mommyish.com/2014/02/17/raising-a-gender-neutral-child/a).    

                Overall, I think it's important for the child to decide things for themselves, whether it be the clothes they wear, the way they act, the way they want their hair, the toys they play with, or whatever it may be. I think that teaching children what gender is, but not forcing them to comply to gender norms is important. Sending a child out into the world with no understanding of gender could have negative effects in our society that heavily values gender and gendered things.  Children also need structure of some sort or else they enter the world thinking they can do whatever they want, and teaching sex and gender might be more beneficial to them and lead them to have a general understanding of life.

Stressed, Tired, Rushed: Portrait of the Modern Family

                These days, children are more likely to grow up in a family where both parents work. In nearly 2/3 of all two-parent families, both parents work full time. This shows that our family structure has changed, but research shows that public policy and workplace structures have not changed to accommodate a time where both parents work. Working parents often express feelings stressed, tired, rushed, and say that they have a limited about of quantity time with children, friends, partners, or hobbies. College-educated parents and white parents are more likely to express that managing work and family life is more difficult than parents of other backgrounds. Fifty-six percent of working parents say that balancing home and work life is difficult, and those who do are more likely to say that parenting is tiring and stressful, and less likely to find it always enjoyable and rewarding. Half of those parents that said balancing work and family life was easy said that parenting was enjoyable all the time, compared to the 36% of those who said balancing was difficult.

                Of full-time working parents, 39 percent of mothers and 50 percent of fathers say they feel like they don't spend enough time with their children. Fifty-nine percent of full-time working moms say they don't have enough free time to relax, and more than half of working fathers agree. Of parents with college degrees, 65 percent said they found it difficult to balance work and family life, with 49 percent of nongraduates agreeing. While the author did not investigate why, one reason might be that professional workers are more likely than hourly workers to be expected to work even after they leave the office. However, they also tend to have more flexibility during the day.The author found that white parents were more than 10 percentage points more likely to express stress than nonwhite parents. Historically, white and black mothers have been more likely to work outside the home than Asian and Latina mothers, and foreign-born mothers have been particularly likely to stay home. In 46 percent of all two-parent households, both parents work full-time, according to the author, up from the 31% it was in 1970. The number of households with a mom who stays home has declined from 46% to 26%. The author surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,807 parents in every state using both landlines and cellphones.  Other data also show that working parents are the new normal with 60% of children now living in households where all the parents at home work at least part time, up from 40% in 1965. Forty-one percent of working moms said that being a parent made it harder to advance in their careers, compared with 20% of the fathers. Men's careers took priority more often than women's did, though the majority said they were equal. Dads earned more than moms in half of full-time working families, the same as moms in about a quarter and less than mothers in a quarter.

                Studies show that women do the majority of the child care and housework even when parents work full time. In terms of child care, women are more likely to manage the mental checklists of their children's needs and schedules. Fathers don't seem to believe this though as they are more likely to say that the housework and childcare are divided equally when compared to mothers, where 56% of dads say they share responsibilities equally while only 46% of mothers agree. Fathers and mothers are much more likely to equally share in doing household chores, disciplining children and playing with them. In "The Seconds Shift" written by sociologist Arlie Russel Hochschild described the burden that mothers often face since they are responsible housework, childcare, and managing a job. Journalist Jennifer Senior wrote a book called "All Joy and No Fun" talking about how little has changed since Hoschild's book came out in 1989. Senior wrote that working parents still feel similar stressed, but they now have to deal with the expectations of modern parenthood shared with fathers too. Government time-use data show that parents over all do less housework and spend more time with their children than they used to.  The time dad spend on paid work has decreased to 38.5 hours a week from 42 hours in 1965, while the time they spend on housework has doubled to 8.8 hours and the time they spend on child care has tripled to over 7 hours.  Policies like paid family leave, after-school child care, and workplace child care would significantly ease parent stress.

Makeup Assignment - Paris attacks

                After the events in Paris, the world is at a loss for words. Actually, that's a lie, the world seems to have more to say than ever, and what they say has often been racist, Islamaphobic, and Xenophobic. These words almost always come from a place of privilege from people who have never been ridiculed for things outside of their control. The people saying these things lack humanity, there really is no other way to say it. These people are quick to say that out of the billions of Muslims in the world, a teeny tiny portion of so called Muslims, who really aren't even Muslims, is a representative portion and provide reason to hate billions of people because they believe in a slightly different God.

                It's hard to organize one's thoughts in a time like this, a time where fear and hatred are running rampant.  But, it's important to not let fear cloud one's thinking. If I let fear cloud my daily thinking, I would get scared every time a young white man walked into a move theater or a school, and you can't live like that. You can't let the actions of a small group affect how you view everyone. Education is important, and people of privilege often don't want to open their eyes to the reality around them. The vast majority of Muslims are regular people who want to live their lives, raise their families, have their jobs, and live in peace. My heart breaks for these Muslims who are unjustly targeted. People have to learn that these radical Islamists do not follow the rules of an incredibly peaceful and old religion, that ISIS is almost making up their rules as they go, altering very old rules to fit their new agenda. Actually, the number one victims of ISIS are Muslims, often because they're assimilating to more modern culture. Blaming all Muslims for the actions of ISIS is like saying that all Christians are like the Westboro Baptist Church; they're Christian I guess, they just kind of alter the Bible and pick and choose sections to fuel their hate powered agenda.

                People of privilege don't know what it's like to live in fear every day. Every day since 9/11 Muslim Americans have had to live in fear. Muslim women have had to forgo wearing their head coverings because of verbal harassment and even physical assault. Mosques have been targeted by bombing and have been defaced by ignorant and fearful people. Hate crimes are a daily part of Muslim and other minority lives, and people of privilege don't want to admit that. It's easier for people of privilege to clump people together, putting the dangerous with the peaceful.

                The outwithgeorge.com article said it best: "People of Christian Faith are rushing to condemn and antagonize innocent people who had nothing to do with the attacks, as if Christianity has not often been the sword that has left rivers of blood in the street." Christians are so quick to denounce the act of radical Islamists and blame all Muslims, but are just as quick to denounce that their beliefs led to the death of millions throughout history.

                If you want to talk about white privilege, a lot of white people don't, but it's important if you want to understand the way our media works. A lot of things happened this past week, not only the terrorist attacks in Paris. There were terrorist attacks in other countries that weren't well publicized until after the Paris attacks. This shows white privilege because we only care when other people die, not brown people. White people are the priority to other white people, as it brown people aren't people because their skin is different and they worship a different god. People are so quick to stand with Paris and change their profile picture to a French flag or a picture in Paris, but they won't even acknowledge the terrorist attacks in Beirut where tens of Muslims were murdered by ISIS. I understand that America emphasizes with France because of our shared history and alliances, but we cannot forget about other people in the world that are victims from the same causes. We cannot forget the Syrian refugees dying trying to escape their home country, overrun by ISIS, trying to find a safe place to live without fear. We're now turning these refugees away because our fear is stronger than our humanity to help those desperately in need. Outwithgeorge.com yet again said it best: "as if anyone blamed German Jews for the Nazi occupation, though they were all German by nationality."

Social Networks

                As a not avid Facebook user, the only reason I really go on is to see my cousin's kids. Of course though, when I check I get wrapped up in the hustle and bustle of everyone's lives. Not many people I know are active on Facebook these days, mainly older family members and people from my hometown and high school that never really grew up or moved on. Occasionally, current and old friends will post something, but posts are not often seen. The posts that come across my feed have heavily revolved around racism, politics, sexism, children/pregnancy, not funny funny videos, and The Walking Dead spoilers.  Racism and politics are huge lately, because obviously everyone is a politician and completely educated (just kidding). People use these Facebook pages to tell people about themselves and their beliefs, and whether those beliefs are good or bad is up for debate, for the most part. But, whether they're good or bad, these profiles are public and can have negative ramifications for the user spewing hate and ignorance, or cursing, or posting sexual pictures, as detailed in this article. While I believe in free speech, there are limits, mainly if your ideas endanger others, you should probably stop, chill out, and rethink some things before posting on the internet. It always seems like those with the most to say are those who are the least nice I guess I could say.

                There are a multitude of people that are super pro-America to the extreme that they have a hatred towards "illegal immigrants," regular immigrants, minorities, people wanting to take their guns, and have a lack of understanding of politics and public policy. They constantly post stuff like "if you don't like the military, then just leave," "you can't take our guns," "make people on welfare take drug tests before getting welfare," or just other generally racist comments that make me so angry I can't even write them. Loving your country is one thing, but these people take it to a whole new level. The way these people present themselves can be aversive to people that don't think like them, and their racists posts can negatively affect them later in life.

                There are boys and girls that present themselves in not so professional ways on their Facebook pages. Maybe these people have a history of over sharing about how much they hate their current/old job, how much weed they smoke, or how drunk they got this weekend. While I'm a firm supporter of doing what you want and dressing like you want as long as it doesn't harm others, the way these people present themselves may have negative effects later as well. Future employers may not be too keen on hiring a man that constantly posts shirtless selfies or a woman that constantly dresses in a revealing manner. Like previously said, I'm all for doing what you want, but people have to be careful about how they present themselves in a society that is heavily focused on social media.

                These Facebook pages do represent the people that made them, whether it be good or bad. They serve as online personalities for people to get to know someone else without making the effort of actually getting to know someone else. These profiles provide quick snippets of people's thoughts and ideas so that others can make a judgment on whether or not they should waste their time with that other person.

Cultural Stereotypes and Personal Beliefs About Individuals With Dwarfism

                The article starts of discussing that a lot of different types of people have been studied in terms of prejudice and stereotyping, but individuals with Dwarfism have been ignored for the most part. Medical research on little people is vast and expansive, but psychological research is sparse. Understanding stereotypes related to little people is important because it can help expand knowledge regarding stereotypes of other groups with distinct physical characteristics. The current research is interested at looking at perceptions of the majority group, typically referred to as average height individuals, toward individuals with Dwarfism. This article looked at three different studies to examine both average height individuals’ awareness of cultural-level stereotypes and their personal-level beliefs about little people.

                In study 1, they assessed the content of cultural stereotypes and personal beliefs regarding little people using an adjective checklist method. They used 172 average height undergrads enrolled in psych classes at three separate college across the country. The average age was 21.08, 64.53% were female, and 34.30% were male, with 2 participants not indicating gender. The 10 most commonly endorsed traits for the cultural stereotype were: weird (40.1% of respondents), incapable (34.7%), creepy (32.9%), unathletic (29.3%), childlike(26.3%), clumsy(22.8%), entertaining(18.6%), lowself-esteem(18.6%), quick-tempered (18.0%), and humorous (13.8%).The 10 most commonly endorsed traits for personal beliefs were: capable (34.4% of respondents), independent (28.8%), intelligent (20.9%), individualistic (20.9%), kind (19.6%), ambitious (17.8%), sensitive (16.6%), low self-esteem (14.1%), loyal to family ties (13.5%), and witty (12.9%). Generally speaking, students had unfavorable impressions of little people, with the only positive thing they believed about little people was their ability to make others laugh, which can easily be perceived as negative also.

                In study 2, they examined the content of cultural and personal beliefs again, and  they employed a between-subjects design, so that any given participant only selected traits to reflect the cultural stereotype or to reflect his or her personal beliefs. They used 94 average height undergrads with an average age of 21.89. 78.72% of participants were female and 19.15% were male, with 2 not indicating gender. The 10 most commonly endorsed traits for the cultural stereotype were incapable (37.0% of respondents), childlike (34.8%), weird (32.6%), creepy (30.4%), low self-esteem (30.4%), unathletic (21.7%), humorous (21.7%), quick tempered (17.4%), entertaining (15.2%), and sensitive (13.0%). The 10 most commonly endorsed traits for personal beliefs were capable (52.6% of respondents), individualistic (28.9%), independent (26.3%), ambitious (26.3%), unathletic (23.7%), intelligent (21.1%), persistent (21.1%), kind (18.4%), reserved (18.4%), and sensitive (18.4%). They found that  the content of the cultural stereotype of little people was primarily negative, whereas personal beliefs were primarily positive, meaning that little people do not align to the negative perceptions about themselves.

                In study 3, they addressed the aforementioned limitations by assessing average height participants’ cognitive and affective reactions to little people using an open-ended method. They used 195 undergrad participants with an average age of 19.86. 67.18% of participants were female and 31.80% were male, with two participants not indicating their gender. Despite only asking participants to indicate personal beliefs, the most commonly cited characteristics were a mixture of favorable and unfavorable qualities. These included quick-tempered (33.7% of respondents), kind (30.2%), humorous (22.5%), happy (21.9%), low self-esteem (20.1%), incapable (16.6%), ambitious (16.6%), intelligent (13.6%), capable (12.4%), and clumsy (11.8%). A number of the most commonly cited characteristics using the close-ended method did not appear with the present open-ended approach, including weird, childlike, unathletic, entertaining, independent, and creepy (all less than 10%).The most frequently cited emotional reactions in response to little people were cheerfulness (54.9% of respondents), sympathy (52.2%), sadness (50.5%), nervousness (35.3%), affection (27.7%), anger (25.0%), surprise (19.0%), fear (18.5%), joy (10.9%), and zest (9.8%).

                The general picture of little people by average height people is a negative one, with characteristics like: weird, childlike, quick-tempered, and incapable. These reactions may stem from the historically media-driven tendency to view little people as objects of entertainment.