Fitting In

Going off the discussion we were having on Thursday, I'd like to shed light on the fact that it is society that is scrutinizing the poor, certain races, and certain genders but they then expect them to live up to these expectations of a "normal society". It's like society is cutting off there legs right from underneath them. If you hear your whole life that you are not supposed to amount to anything, then you wont know how to aspire to do anything else but that. Bringing eugenics into it, the government was actually paying people to not have babies because they did not want that type of person to amount to anything anymore. Then and now people of this world have been trying to force every single person into a certain category. If you don't fit then something must be wrong with you. In my opinion it is those people who need to open there eyes and realize the beauty of diversity. Also several people look down upon someone with Autism or Down Syndrome because they can't do what "normal" people of society can do. In my opinion though, people who have those cases have some of the most beautiful minds and spirits. Perhaps society should learn from them instead of making this world all about the numbers instead of the people.

In Response To Jessica's post "The Welfare System"

I agree with Jessica's proposal but as I mentioned in class, I think that the welfare system itself also needs to be fixed. Enacting requirements on limits for welfare and ascertaining a family's consumption are solutions to the effects of the problem, as opposed to solutions to the causes. It is far more effective to simply address the causes and make sure it is easier to use the system to minimum as opposed to abusing it.

As part of my internship this semester with Congressman Tom Reed I had the chance to meet with the director of Chautauqua Opportunities, a Dunkirk located organization that serves poor and disadvantaged people in that area. The director's number one concern was not that people were exploiting the welfare system, it was that the welfare system was entrapping those in it. While there are always some bad apples in the bunch, she emphasized that most people who were on welfare and part of her program wanted to get off welfare but it is simply a bad decision on their part. For example, she mentioned that when somebody goes off welfare and gets a job they are bumped up a tax class and therefore end up making less money then before. They also lose other governmental breaks and benefits from getting off of welfare. It seems that indeed people are milking the welfare system but not out of greed, it is simply to maximize the minimal resources they already have. This is human nature, to do what is one's best interest. If this is at the expense of taxpayer's and one's dignity, than so be it. Survival is more important than pride and faceless citizens.

The solution, the director explained, is to have Congress changed the myriad laws governing the welfare system. I'm not expert on such things and I can't quite remember the specifics of her plan, but suffice it say it involved changing incentives for going off welfare. It should be more beneficial for a person to go off welfare than to be on it. Perhaps taxes would be lower or non existent for a person off of welfare until they reach the next income bracket? Perhaps an (temporary) increase in breaks and benefits for those off of welfare? Whatever it may be, the welfare system should be designed so recipients clearly do it as a last resort. They also need incentives to get off it as soon as possible. In addition we should also enact the measures Jessica mentioned. Together I think these would make for an effective base of rules for a improved welfare system. 

The Welfare System

Today in class we talked about the welfare system. I know that there are a lot of different views on the welfare system. Our book states that most people think of an unemployed black woman, yet most women on welfare are not black. I believe this fact. I personally believe that there should be some sort of time restraint on the welfare system, and the recipients should be checked up on every so often to ensure that the money is being spent on items that should be purchased. As an employee in a supermarket I see people on welfare everyday. Yes I may not know that family's situation but I do not believe that those on welfare should be able to take money off their welfare cards and purchase alcohol or lottery tickets. Both things that I see on a everyday basis. I just don't see how it is fair the some people work two or three minimum wage jobs to support their family's or themselves because they do not qualify for welfare but those who do qualify may not work one job or even try looking for a job, therefore taking advantage of the welfare system.  

Race and Ethnicity issues Connected to Welfare & Eugenics

I think what is often overlooked when debating social issues in our society, are the racial and ethnic issues that our country has battled for centuries and how they came to be. It is evident that race is a social construct and something we have attached significance since the first encounter with Africans. With this notion that darker skinned humans are "uncivilized and barbaric" therefore determining that they are inferior; this doesn't actually mean that they are inferior or somehow biologically structured to be less than those of lighter skin. White people often blame the victim and do not think outside of the box when addressing problems within our society. It is not intentional, it is just the way we have been conditioned, to not see white privilege. So when you say that people on welfare, struggling to survive, have options, you are inferring that they have the same opportunities available to them, that you do; which is false. Most of these people grew up in poor neighborhoods with little access to quality education and lower class jobs, so not only do they have an innate disadvantage and no knowledge of how to get themselves out of their situation, but if they are a minority they have an even less chance to achieve a higher SES, because of the racial and ethnic categorization that exists in our society.Yes, some people do abuse the system and use their checks to purchase electronics and other luxury items, but this does not mean that the welfare system has no beneficial purpose. Our society is unfair and equal opportunity is not true for everyone, so before you criticize someones situation based on few encounters that you have had, it is important to analyze why they may be in the position they are in and what is preventing them from changing that. It is not as though they want to be receiving welfare checks, maybe it is that they don't have the knowledge or resources to make a better living for themselves.

 In regards to eugenics, the whole reason for this selective breeding process was to perfect and improve races, suggesting that inferiority among race, and people in general, (a concept that was created and molded by humans, specifically white humans) is real. So to say that it was for the benefit of others and society, is just confirming racial purity and the fact that there is such thing as a 'fitter' race. Preferred personality and physical traits for selective breeding is, as a whole, simply ridiculous and conducted by ignorance. It also cannot be justified with the fact that the process of selective breeding and contraceptives like birth control and sterilization in Singapore, will better our society and make social problems and poverty dissipate.

Eugenics Presentation

Europa Europa:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4v9Uk0glSrQ

This clip shows how the Nazi’s used ‘science’ through measurements and facial structure to push the authority of the ‘Aryan race’ as superior to the Jewish ethnicity. Through the use of this pseudo science and the perpetuation of the claims that Aryan/Nordic people are the most-talented and beautiful was a way of getting the population on their side. This ideological structuring of the races, combined with the use of scientific looking tools seemed to give a biological rationalization for some of the Nazi claims.  It also demonstrates how these are false claims when Soloman/Josef Peters is pronounced to be of Aryan ancestry despite the fact that he is Jewish. This shows how Eugenics was used to garner support from the citizens of Germany to the expulsion and eventual mass-murder of millions of Jews. This is much the same way that we see America and Germany supporting the sterilization and euthanasia of African American and Afro-German children and adults.

Information on Graduate Mothers Scheme: http://furrybrowndog.wordpress.com/2011/07/15/dr-tony-tan-was-no-independent-minded-person-on-the-graduate-mothers-scheme

Other Population Control Methods:

http://books.google.com/books?id=AdgsYCXejgYC&pg=PA153&dq=graduate+mothers+scheme&hl=en&sa=X&ei=lvZcUbOeFOnD4AOw-4HwAg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=graduate%20mothers%20scheme&f=false

The graduate mothers scheme, as well as the other population control measures that Singapore used, tie in with both the “Branded with Infamy” article and the chapter “The Black Stork”. The Graduate Mothers Scheme shows the worries of the Singapore government to be the same as those expressed by supporters of Eugenics in America decades earlier. The ‘undesirable’ portion of the population had the highest birth rate, while educated people were discovered to be having less children. From this came what they thought would be good incentives for educated women to want to have children, in the form of admittance of their offspring into the school systems. Other programs included matchmaking services for educated singles and incentives for lower classes to undergo sterilization.

Questions:

1) Do we still hold certain Eugenic beliefs today in regards to birth control?

2) Are the policies that Singapore put into place any less “morally repugnant” than those methods used in America and Nazi Germany? (195)

3) What does the use of Eugenics and how easily it was accepted tell us about the way that authority is imposed upon society?

4) Did it surprise you to discover that Planned Parenthood was started by a supporter of Eugenics?

Is Race an Important Part of Literature?

At the end of today’s class, the question of race being a factor of how things are perceived in the book. I believe that the view of how race is a factor depends on the context that you are using. For most of the time when reading the book, I did not consciously remember Skloot was white even when Skloot talked about the interactions between her and her family. Race is an important part when talking about the Lacks family. I believe that it is important to include the race when describing the Lacks family in the sense of ethics and how much those ethics have or haven’t changed. When the family interacts with the medical researchers trying to get more information, Skloot describes the family as being unknowledgeable towards the topic of Henrietta’s cells and taken advantage of. When talking about races of writers in literature, I feel that authors have to express more of their race if they want to try and prove a point. For example, if I was writing about if I lived in a dominant African American residence, I would include apparent differences between me and my neighbors. Skloot does not do that and in my opinion does not have a large effect on the reader’s opinion of race. Do you agree or disagree?

Darren Pope

The Light at the End of the Tunnel

Upon reading the final section of the "immortal" life of Henrietta Lacks I found it to be both a happy ending, yet a slight let down for what was its ending messages. For one, Henrietta's oldest child Joe or Zackriyya as he wishes to be called finally shows some comforting kindness to of all people Skloot for her constant dedication get the right story to tell the world about his mother even going as far as thanking her for her work and the image of the illuminated cells he received from the cancer ward. But the real problem is with Deborah dying and Lacks town completely disappearing from existence which makes me sad for the ending of the book. It seems that in the smallest of ways the Lacks family finally found its closure about the issues of their mother's memory. But once all questions were finally answered and the smallest of payment was made for all the medical injustices it seems the memory faded away symbolizing that Henrietta can finally rest in peace knowing her legacy is secured and her family is whole again. To me this is not the ending I would want to spread to the world. The family never really got anything for all their pain and suffering for the memories they lost for not having a mother to care for them. However, it seems that closure is better then no ending at all I would assume. However, I still wish somethings could have been different about the ending of this book. What do you think? And if you were unsatisfied with the book's ending how might you end it, with a positive outlook or a note of future progress perhaps?

-William Webster