The Craft is one thing that is totally misunderstood by society. Even those who have an open mind, can be intimidated by just a word, such as witch or pagan. It is funny how so much has changed in the world over thousands of years, but peoples thoughts and action toward people who practise the craft. So why is it that we sit back and take the ridicule, we are no different to any other person, we just have our own beliefs.
Over the years that I have practised wicca, things and people have changed. People I meet, and become friends with tend to drop away when they find out what I do, or they tend to be unsure around me. It is not their fault, it is they way they have been raised. And I guess I would not be the only one that this would happen to. Friend who accept you for who you are a true friends, but unless they are interested in the craft as well, you still can’t really talk to them about it. And this is why we search for others that are like minded.
Well now I say it is time to take back our place in the world. It is time to fight back and show people that we are not what they think we are, it is time that the world understood the craft again.
Of course this will take time. But it will take each and every practitioner though out the world to do this. So how can this be done, you say. Well it is easier than you think. The first step is to be open about you belief. Don’t try and hide away and let other get the better of you. Two, sit down with those, such as parents, other family members and friends. Give them some books to read on the subject to help them understand. Introduce it slowly though, too much all at once might be over whelming for them.
Also, positive thinking, think there will be a time where we can walk among society with out hearing those remarks that we dread so much or those filthy looks that we get. Also remember to always be proud of who you are, never be ashamed or hide away. We all need to be strong and take small steps. And always, always believe in yourself.
By: Kylie Sheen
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 30th, 2010. 
Perhaps society holds the lowest regard of all for *** predators, those evil men who prey on that which we hold closest to our hearts as people and parents – our children.
The recent news about John Mark Karr, the former school teacher who allegedly sexually molested and killed 10-year-old JonBenet Ramsey, has been a jarring experience that has reminded us of their ruthlessness and savage nature. Once again, we find ourselves asking, how do we put an end to all this?
Social scientists say that one of the things that make it difficult to stop sexual predators is the fact that their anti-social behavior is mostly invisible to most, except, sadly, to their victims. They are not the type of criminals that are easy to spot or who act suspiciously and avoid coming into contact with law enforcement officers or agencies. On the contrary, many sexual predators have established themselves and are familiar figures in the community or neighborhood. They make their dark side known only when they strike. Oftentimes, they are people whom their victims trust – uncles, neighbors, teachers and the like.
Studies have shown that *** criminals have deep psychological problems as well as physical ones. Social scientists have concluded that these *** offenders are the least likely to reform among all types of criminals. They should be held up to different judicial and legal standards as other criminals considering the high rate of recurrence. In fact, the justice system in some areas already has a different way of dealing with *** offenders.
In California, for example, courts penalize convicted *** criminals with a “civil commitment” in addition to the original sentence that has been handed down in their case. This civil commitment involves incarceration for another two years in a locked-down facility. This is so in recognition of the fact that *** offenders are more likely to re-offend than other criminals and are probably not ready to return to society yet.
The California law that provides for this civil commitment will be brought up before California voters in November, with the key issue being whether these civil commitments should be extended indefinitely for certain criminals that psychological experts consider as continuing threats to society.
Today in California, convicted sexual offenders face up to a two-year “civil commitment” to a locked-down facility in addition to whatever prison sentence they receive. This is because it is considered likely they may re-offend and are not ready to be returned to society.
The rest of the country will likely keep its eyes trained on California to see how effective their approach to *** offenders will be and if it is worthy of emulation.
By: Kadence Buchanan
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 28th, 2010.
The history of the Red Hat Society began in the sunny city of Tucson, Arizona. A wonderful woman, by the name of Sue Ellen, started it all when she meandered along a thrift shop while shopping. She decided on buying a bright red fedora hat.
That bright red fedora has been the symbol of the Red Hat Society. She happened upon a poem “Warning”, written by the author Jenny Joseph. In the poem, a woman explains how she would like life to be when she is older.
“When I am an old woman I shall wear purple, With a red hat which doesn’t go, and doesn’t suit me. And I shall spend my pension on brandy and summer gloves, And satin sandals, and say we’ve no money for butter.” At the end of the poem it explains that the woman presently needs to continue to be a good example to those around her, but maybe she could show a little bit of that impishness through so people wouldn’t be too shocked of her actions when she’s older.
Sue Ellen instantly fell in love with the poem and the idea behind it. She was determined to share the poem with others, and so presented the poem with a vintage red hat to her friend Linda Murphy as a birthday gift. She had hopes Linda would hang the hat by the framed poem in her home as a fun decoration.
What she didn’t realize was that the gift would soon be on to many others. Linda enjoyed the hat and poem so much that she gave the same gift to a friend, and that friend gave the hat and poem to another, and then another. Ms. Joseph’s poem was an instant success.
These ladies that were presented the poems and red hats decided to get together and enjoy each others company. They decided to get together for tea in the regalia of the poem: purple dresses with hats that didn’t go. This is when the first “Red Hat Society” tea occurred.
The tea was a hit and each member of the Red Hat Society continued to invite new members to join in on the fun. More red hats were bought, and the numbers began to grow. By the time the group had grown to 18 people they decided to start new sibling groups.
The Red Hat Society began with a simple, yet important idea. Life is meant to be celebrated. Because, as the poem says, you don’t want people who know you to be too shocked when you are suddenly old and start to wear purple.
By: JJ Storms
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 28th, 2010.
From the Latin word, tradere, meaning “to hand over” or “to hand down”, we derive the modern word, tradition. A tradition is something society finds intrinsically valuable — that is, of value in and of itself, and at the same time, standing the test of time.
Tradition has several elements:
specific content such as music, dance, customs, laws, behaviors; persons charged with transmitting the content intact such as religious, secular or other leaders; recipients of tradition — the society as a whole
Content and Context
By its very nature, tradition has a social context. If it is central to a society, without it, the society disintegrates. Another way to say it is, tradition provides a particular society an awareness of its identity and the reason it exists. Tradition acts like a glue that holds a society together in peace, or a frame of reference within which to gauge behaviors of a society or its members.
Traditions are an inheritance, and cease to exist when they are no longer critical to the life of the society practicing them. Sometimes traditions are simply abandoned to the detriment of a society’s heritage and identity and must be reclaimed in some form to restore a lost or diminished identity.
Japanese director Yamada Yoji, when directing The Hidden Blade, referenced this point when he lamented the loss of certain gracious gestures and ways of thinking and acting that have disappeared from Japanese society at large through technological developments and Westernization. Directing period films brought home the need to preserve, at least in film, some of the ancient ways for the sake of the Japanese identity.
Transmission of Tradition
Tradition is not a dead and useless thing such as a bug frozen in amber, but rather is a living thing, which can be built upon and evolve. It grows organically from within as opposed to being imposed from outside. We cannot manufacture tradition any more than we can manufacture a star or a turtle or a tree. To attempt to transform a tradition fundamentally or massively as, for instance President Obama said he intended to do to America, is to kill it. We cannot turn a frog into a rabbit or a blade of grass into a cornstalk. And to attempt continually to change tradition trivializes all of what has gone before and those who handed it down faithfully.
Passing on the contents of any given tradition can be more or less successful, depending on the knowledge and dedication of those to whom the traditions have been entrusted. If no loyalty to the tradition exists in them, nor a sense of serious obligation, then the failure to pass on faithfully the tradition as given them results in a betrayal of the society.
D.Q. McInerny, Ph.D. Professor of Philosophy at Our Lady of Guadalupe Seminary wrote in the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter Newsletter, May, 1999:
“The value of any tradition depends directly on the value of its contents, and its centrality to the society to which it pertains… The contents of some traditions are so valuable…that if those contents were to be seriously compromised, the survival of the societies themselves would be jeopardized. This is preeminently the case with regard to sacred tradition and its relation to the Catholic Church.”
Since the 1960s, the inveterate and unauthorized tinkerers with the Sacred Liturgy and pious practices of the Catholic Church have caused many of its traditions to be obscured in the minds of worshippers. Some Church authorities fall into the category of those who have no sense of obligation towards sacred tradition even though they have been entrusted and charged, by virtue of their positions, with the task of passing it on.
An entire generation has now passed without a clear understanding of the term “sacrifice” regarding the Mass. In this example we have both trivialization and betrayal which has brought about a struggle in the Church for the restoration of tradition. Today we see many young Catholics married, with children, filling churches where the Traditional Mass has been restored or where the rituals of the New Mass have been brought more in line with tradition. Tradition is not dead in this case, nor dying, but living and continuing in modern Catholic movements such as “the Reform of the Reform” and the “Traditional Mass Movement” in spite of the best efforts of those who sought to quell it or simply abandon it.
In this example we also see that forcing the abandonment of tradition valued by many in a society results in conflict that can continue for many years, no matter how diligently authorities attempt to smother it.
Reception of Tradition
Receivers of tradition must have a healthy attitude towards it in order to absorb it effectively. If the receiver does not see the necessity of the tradition, he will not live it, nor will he be able to pass it on with integrity. Eventually the tradition dies. In the process, the society either changes into something it was never meant to be or disappears altogether.
Today many Americans are reawakening interest in their founding documents. People in record numbers are rising off their couches and coming together in a renewed commitment to the American traditions of free speech, free enterprise, and freedom of assembly through participation in conservative movements such as what has been dubbed “The Tea Party Movement.” History will show whether enough receivers of tradition exist for Americans to grow along the trajectory handed down by the patriot founders or whether American society will cease to exist as it has been known. In either case, knowing and applying the three elements of tradition can provide a map for analysis and decision.
Copyright Barbara A. Schoeneberger 2009
By: Barbara Schoeneberger
About the Author:
Read more on Tradition and Society – How a Culture Lives Or Dies…
Filed under Society by on Jun 19th, 2010.
When you start to delve into the question “what is society” you will realize that this is indeed a very deep subject. There is no one answer because a society is not a thing that can be easily explained in one or two sentences. In fact, this could actually be a topic for a thesis by a graduate student in philosophy and it would take many volumes to include all the possible answers. Let’s start by looking at what we consider to be a society.
In our daily lives, a society is the place where we live. It is made up of the government, the education system, the health care and the many occupations that people have. Each and every person is an important part of a society because each one has something to contribute. It is a very broad concept that is often broken down into different segments or facets of life. Within a society, there are smaller societies or groups of people who have a particular goal or ambition. These could be government agencies, groups of students or groups raising money for a cause.
There are also other factors that separate smaller societies from one another. These include culture, language, race, and religion. Within a society, there can be many different cultures. If you look at the whole world as one society, you can easily realize just how many differences there are. Even within a country, city or town, you have numerous differences and you can even have different societies within a neighborhood. The neighborhood of a city could be an ethnic society all its own.
In the larger frame of things, all these societies interact with one another on a daily basis bringing new ideas and ways of doing things. Customs transfer from one culture to another, immigrants become assimilated within a society and people react with violence when a part of their society is threatened. All of these things make up a society, which is more of a quality than a thing.
By: Jordi Shoman
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 19th, 2010.
Phil and Sonya Thomas continue to fight their local school system. As they wait for the proceedings to begin, they feel the matter could have been avoided if their son’s teacher would have listened. Now, the matter has escalated to this. With their lawyer at their side, the parents watch as the principal defends the teacher: she was justified in labeling their son. The school system experts also support the teacher. Sonya Thomas struggles to reframe herself. “We don’t care what the experts say. It isn’t the school’s right to categorize our son. You are only looking at the outside.” She breaks down. “Why can’t you accept that our son isn’t white? He’s a black American.” The room gets quiet.
The US Dilemma
As many voters turn their attention to the presidential election, the media continues to remind us of race. With a white mother from Kansas and a black father from Kenya, Barak Obama makes us uneasy with his racial background. Some people view him as “too black” while others declare that he is just “not black enough.” Individuals with a mixed heritage betray our hidden beliefs and sometimes our prejudices. For example, rapper Kanye West in 2006 told Essence Magazine, “If it wasn’t for race mixing, there’d be no video girls.” Growing up in Louisiana, we lived with a one-drop rule. The one-drop rule holds that individuals with any degree of African ancestry cannot be white. In fact, it makes that person 100% black. In this narrow viewpoint, regardless of the race of the mother the child is determined black. Therefore, regardless of a person’s racial preference, society seeks to make its own judgment of an individual based on a person’s skin color. In most cases, society forces children to make a decision early in life. Shouldn’t we be free from societal racial classification? Let’s further explore this unique situation.
The Historical Perspective
During slavery and the Jim Crow Era, racial laws were developed to prevent intermarriage and co-mingling with other races. In the South, determining one’s race was a fact of life. The term “mulatto” was originally used to describe the union of whites and blacks. From 1870 to 1880, multatto included quadroons, octoroons, and all persons having any perceptible trace of African blood. Demographics are now changing in America. According to the US 2000 Census, there are 3.1 million *********** couples. In fact, one in every 20 children is born from a mixed-race heritage. Many people focus solely on black and white integration. However, this multigenerational movement is far more extensive. According to University of Michigan researchers, Asian Americans have the highest outmarriage rates among racial and ethnic groups (about one and a half million children under age 17 had one Asian parent and another non-Asian parent in 1990). Many of today’s most talented celebrities come from a mixed heritage. They include Dwayne “The Rock,” Johnson, Halle Berry, Vin Diesel, Derek Jeter, Rachel Smith, and Tiger Woods. For many Generation Xers and Millenniums, the formation of a multiracial society is normal. Many older Americans are not as comfortable with *********** mixing. However, they aren’t the only individuals dealing with racial problems. Many times multiracial children have a difficult time coping with a racially charged society. Charlotte Nitardy, in her article “Identity problems in biracial youth,” noted that biracial children have issues with racial identity problems. In many cases, biracial children are faced with choosing one racial group and rejecting the other in order to survive in society.
The Real Challenge
Are the old racial labels outdated for this multiracial generation? Anne Tsui and Barbara Gutek, authors of Demographic Differences in Organizations, maintain that there is still unrest about diversity. They explain, “Below the surface of increased activities and some apparent progress in diversity efforts by companies lie feelings of discomfort, frustration, confusion, and even anger, among women and men, ethnic minorities and the white majority.” Today’s children have little concept of segregated living. Dating outside of one’s race is pretty common in most communities. The US Census has been in charge of tracking the racial classification in this country. Clearly, checking one box or multiple boxes for one racial identification may not be practical now. In fact, because of *********** dating, social demographic changes, and individuals’ right to self-determine their racial preference, the census data may make little sense for the America of the future. Consequently, it may become a distant memory as the multiracial generation continues to expand across America. Unfortunately, society still wrestles with how to deal with this multiracial generation. Will America be ready for a multiracial president or a growing self-identifying multiracial generation? I am optimistic that we are ready. The clock is ticking on America.
By: Daryl Green
About the Author:
Read more on How to Understand the US Multiracial Society – Can it Change Our Future?…
Filed under Society by on Jun 19th, 2010.
To save the society on edge of slippery slope, those in power are always trying to solve, or at least, alleviate social problems like crimes, depravity, discrimination, lacking of responsibility, laziness and so on. Those existing social problems are the most significant hot irons, which, if not been paid enough notice and treated as soon as possible, will soon grow into lethal cancers of the society.
The society is always on changing, so are the social problems rooted in it. As the society grows into a complex, multiply stratified one with diversified ideas, values, beliefs and sub-cultures, social problems are inevitably growing from the initially simple, polarized ones into more acrimonious and confusing ones which cannot be labeled as right or wrong any more. In such a dilemma, the authority of the society has to allocate more money for those immediate, existing social problems, in that more intellects and labors are needed to develop specified and fair social disciplines, to supervise and guarantee the exacting of these rules, to help people establish healthy personalities and sound minds, to lay an iron-hand on the violation of laws, and to achieve a subtle balance between different groups of the society.
Yet we should never blunder neglecting importance of the long term research, which might not only help future generations, but also help ourselves. Some social problems, especially those of ethics and values, are deep rooted and not so easily be solved in near future. They may take years, decades or even generations to be excavated and eliminated, gradually. Maybe no fast or brilliant outcomes can be seen when investment is made to this kind of social problems, however, if we never make the very first step, these problems will never be solved. Though these problems seem to be inert and have no fatal impacts to the current society, the fail to conduct them or at least keep them under proper control will easily exacerbate them to some latent dangers.
If we look inside both those acute and chronic social problems, we will find, to some extent, the latter are where the former actually arise from. In other word, those immediate, existing social problems are bombs made from the gun-powder store of those chronic problems. The research of the long term problems will largely help people to understand the immediate, existing ones, thus to have a better solutions to them.
Society is a continuously developing one which cannot be broken up in any specific point. It is important to allocate enough money to the immediate social problems, while it is also necessary to pay enough attention to the long-term ones. Only when a good balance is kept well between the two can the society have a stable present and stable future.
By: Richard Perry
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 17th, 2010.
What is a homogeneous society? A homogeneous society is such a society where most of the people share the same type of cultural values, language, ethnicity and religious system. Recent research has found that archaic Homo Sapiens evolved to anatomically modern humans in between 200,000 and 100,000 years ago, then some members of modern humans started to leave Africa by 60,000 years ago into different parts of the world and environment made us ethnically diverse, otherwise in the beginning of the history of human race we all were black men. In that sense black people are our real ancestors-our root. If you closely observe some common behavior of humans you will find that no matter how much culturally and religiously divided we are , most of the nationals of the world share same types of human quality(bad and good human natures) and similar types of myths found in many countries. It does not matter if your were born in Latin American or Europe, most of us share the common social values and think almost the same way.
Types of homogeneous society
Homogeneity comes to a society in a number of ways-ethnically(Japanese), religiously(many Arab nationals), culturally(Indians), politically(communism) etc. Study has shown that the most prominent type of homogeneity is the ethnic one, where all the people have similar type complexion and cultural. Financial homogeneity also exists in many countries, it was prevalent in many communist countries-this type of homogeneous society is in decline. Ethnic homogeneity is still strong in many aboriginal groups in USA, in Latin countries and in Africa.
By: Andro Mida
About the Author:
Filed under Society by on Jun 17th, 2010.
The success of any society is ultimately determined by how well its population lives and dies. Within this paradigm of “successful population” are two fundamental elements – individual and collective wellness. A successful society therefore embodies the notion that both individuals and the overall population are well, and these two measures are reasonable assessments of the wellness, and hence the success of any given society.
In other words, the success of a society can be assessed, characterized, and understood through these two main measures. To break it down, individual wellness consists of answering the question: does the society reasonably allow and encourage individuals to be well? Secondly, does the society allow and encourage wellness for the entire population from birth to death? To the latter question, the most important component of population wellness and hence, societal success, is the degree to which the sum of individual wellness creates collective wellness. The single-most important component of population wellness is a high level of population health, measured by the numbers of individuals who are well or have reasonable access to being well.
The four scenarios below represent a summary snapshot of healthcare systems currently in existence in the Western Hemisphere. The scenarios are predicated on the reality that the cost of healthcare is (next to purchasing a home) the most expensive cost one will experience during his or her lifetime and that these costs are expected to continue to escalate over time as new technology, treatments, and pharmaceuticals continue to drive costs. These four main approaches to healthcare are:
1. No healthcare programs (other than free market)
2. Universally funded programs
3. Insurance company funded programs
4. Combinations of the above
These four healthcare approaches are summarized below with respect to how well they represent the ability to create a successful society. Remember, a successful society is one that encourages, promotes, and allows for both individual and collective wellness, as measured by population health.
1. No Healthcare Programs: Countries which have no healthcare programs generally have lower than average population health. While some members of the population in these societies (namely the very rich) who are able to afford healthcare may be healthy indeed, the overall population health is often quite low. It is important to note that socioeconomic status is generally a good predictor of population health. In countries where no healthcare programs exist, and the reason for these lack of programs is lack of finances, then population health is usually comparatively low. Using our definitions of societal success, the success of these societies would be low, or unsuccessful.
2. Government Sponsored Programs: Countries with government sponsored and funded universal healthcare programs generally have a collectively higher level of healthcare than other countries. Again, if the one applies the definition of success of the entire population as the sum total of the wellness of all individuals within that system, then countries which offer healthcare programs that collectively confer benefits on the highest number of individuals are, by definition, successful. Since one cannot be more than well, there is no incentive for individuals to access more services than are required in order to be well. Leaving aside preventative programs and social marketing costs as key aspects of overall population health, health and wellness can be accessed within government sponsored programs up to a certain level depending on the aggregate overall need of the population. Therefore, by definition, and in spite of incentives and disincentives within the system, the societies that employ these systems are successful.
3. Insurance Company: Healthcare programs sponsored by insurance corporations can work well, provided that the insurance coverage provides all members of society with at least basic coverage and coverage through catastrophic illness. Nobody plans on getting leukemia, or ALS, or meningitis, or lupus, for instance. If you are well-educated and have a position with health benefits with a corporation or you have been successful in your career or business, then it is likely you will be able to afford the costs of healthcare. However, since healthcare and profit-motive are mixed within the same crucible, there is a strong incentive to cheat or to create environments where profit supersedes care if the two vie for supremacy – much as suggested in Michael Moore’s movie, Sicko. The active removal or denial of healthcare is a logical and inevitable outcome of a for-profit, insurance corporation controlled system of care delivery – particularly where the population is aging. Also, there is no compelling motive for insurance corporations to cover individuals susceptible to high healthcare costs (i.e., those with catastrophic physical illness; mental illness; the frail elderly; new mothers and infants), period. The outcome of such a system would be to spiral into category 1 – No healthcare programs – (mediated by a very few insurance companies) wherein the richest segments of society would be able to access services. The irony is, the richest citizenry often require much less healthcare than others. The upshot is this: there is an increasing disparity in the number of people who are able to access healthcare in the face of age and cost escalations. One needs to question the current and future success of these social systems.
4. Combinations of Above: Combinations of the above become extremely complex and difficult to assess. There are certainly advantages and disadvantages, as well as incentives and disincentives for a hybrid of the above systems. Each of these advantages and incentives (or lack of) are inextricably connected to the socioeconomic class you and your family belong to or are transitioning into as well as a host of external and internal factors. A government funded universal system provides healthcare to everyone, including those who are disadvantaged and could not possibly access care without subsidization. It also provides care to those who are charged by some who would abuse care (though unclear who this group might be as people do not consume unlimited healthcare once they are well). Alternatively, the system dominated by large insurance companies provides very high quality, responsive care to individuals who can pay or who are insured by corporations who in turn can pay. This system works well where individuals insured are reasonably healthy and young. A problem occurs when the population of employees becomes older and insurance premiums are either hiked to cover extraordinarily high costs (insurers will only cover healthcare costs where the profits of covering healthcare costs actuarially calculated costs) or removed entirely. Countries in which no healthcare programs exist (presuming healthcare is available) results in costly but accessible services for the very few. There is no need to get into the obvious personal suffering and strife in this latter healthcare system.
To summarize the four systems discussed:
1. The richest members of society will continue to receive care regardless of the system in place.
2. The poor will suffer the most in instances where there is either no system in place or where insurance corporations are the primary arbiters of healthcare delivery.
3. The government funded universal system provides care to the greatest number of individuals in society, despite any shortcomings.
4. Profit motive and linkages to incentive to constrain services and limit accessibility becomes increasingly prevalent as the workforce ages (and healthcare benefits supplied by employers become accessed more frequently).
5. Societal Success = providing the opportunity for wellness for the greatest number of people that make up the society.
In conclusion, the success of a society is correlated with the individual and collective wellness of that society. Wellness of the society is inextricably linked to the overall health of the population within that society.
Societies that provide healthcare to the highest number of individuals to an established floor (as opposed to ceiling) level of care (inclusive of the most downtrodden and indigent) are successful. A ceiling level of care is redundant when referring to healthcare, since, with the exception of only an extremely rare and unusual incidence, people only access healthcare up to the amount which will result in wellness. For instance, unlike other goods or services (e.g., Ferraris, Rolex watches, massages, Gucci handbags), obtaining healthcare in excess amounts is both redundant and ridiculous and counterintuitive to human nature.
It is therefore reasonable to suggest that a system of care which provides for the greatest number in society (e.g., everyone), the most vulnerable in society; as well as those at the highest rungs of the socioeconomic ladder and everyone in between could reasonably be argued as the most effective. To those who would charge or decry a system that would benefit everyone as inefficient or unaccountable and therefore untenable, it is important to ask where they, themselves, fit into the healthcare-socioeconomic landscape. Secondly, are they interested in the societal success, will their approach move the society toward success, or are their own parochial interests – however they are justified – masquerading as societal success. You be the judge.
In essence, evangelizing capitalism to the exclusion or minimization of societal success as measured by population health is tantamount to “cutting off your nose to spite your face”.
By: Shane Busby
About the Author:
Read more on Towards A Successful Society – Healthcare And Capitalist Evangelism…
Filed under Society by on Jun 17th, 2010.
Sexual Stigmas of Society
An interesting topic was brought up in the comments section of a blog post I was reading earlier which made me think more about the sexual stigmas that society places on us today and how those stigmas have changed throughout the years.
The topic was brought up because there was only one female on a small team of developers for a website. This started the discussion on why more females did not work in technical fields and an interesting point was brought up that women who do choose this field often do so at a disadvantage because they are not typically allowed to “tinker” with things as much as boys are.
You can make the same comparison to women in the automotive repair industry. I come from a long line of auto mechanics and my own mother knows her way around a car or two- with the ability to build one from scratch with nothing more than a frame. However, many young girls are never given the opportunity to even look under the hood of a car so if they become adults who want to work in the profession, they would obviously be starting out behind the rest of the group.
Or think about the young man who wants to work with hair but was raised to think that was something only girls do. Most girls sit around and comb, brush and braid one another’s hair from a very young age but most boys aren’t given this opportunity. If he gets older and decides to go to school for cosmetology, he will be a few steps behind all of the girls who already have experience in this.
Why is it that we have these stigmas in our society that say people of a certain *** should be working in certain professions and that those of another *** cannot work successfully in a particular profession? Could these be leftover remnants of sexual prejudices that still slip through even in this modern society we live in?
I believe much of this has to do with how we are raised as children. I encourage all four of my children (2 boys, 2 girls) to explore any interests they have, regardless of whether society deems it more appropriate for a male or female. I hope this helps them grow up without the binds of sexual stigma so they can be anything they want to be.
If you’re a parent, role model to children or anyone who works with or around children, think about the impressions you are giving them in regards to what men and women can and cannot do. Are you limited their dreams for the future by leading them to believe that *** determines what they can do?
By: Lisa A Mason
About the Author:
marketing business
Read more on Sexual Stigmas of Society…
Tags: Automotive Repair, Comments Section, Females, Remnants, Stigmas.
Filed under Society by admin on Jun 17th, 2010.