More Trouble with the Disney Princess Enterprise

The group of ten (now eleven) Disney Princesses are some of the most influential characters in the lives of American girls. Many young girls dream of being a princess so it is no surprise that they learn from these "role models". Disney has been criticized for many things including the race of a princess, as I wrote about in my blogpost Disney Princesses and Diversity, and is now being scrutinized for the gender stereotypes that they are enforcing. This is not a new criticism because the messages of some of the films have always had some backlash. In almost every film, beauty and finding true love are the emphasis but Disney expects the audience to reach beneath the surface and grasp the genuine morals that surround these themes. But, there is no way to escape the reality that beauty is praised in our society.

This summer Pixar, in conjunction with Disney, released Brave that told the story of a yet another princess. Instead, this film was about a Scottish princess named Merida who wanted to go against the princess "norms". Overall, the movie was a success. A few weeks ago, Disney announced that they wanted to include Merida as an official Disney Princesses. I read an article that detailed the makeover she had in order to make her an "official" addition to the Disney group. In the redesign, Disney "tamed her unruly hair, expanded her breasts, shrank her waist, enlarged her eyes, plastered on makeup, pulled her (now glittering) dress off her shoulders, and morphed her defiant posture into a come-hither pose". I also find it interesting that in the Disney redesign, she is not carrying a bow and arrow that could be interpreted as her personal symbol of power.

All of the princess, in some shape or form, have been made over for the Disney Princess website. In this case, critics worry that the redesign is going against the message of the movie and does not accurately represent the attitude that the main character would posses. In an initial review of the film in the Chicago Tribune, a movie critic wrote that, "[Brave] is at heart a story of a daughter and a mother learning to cut through society's expectations".This important message of "cutting through society's expectations" is applauded in one sense but held back by Disney when they plan to remake Merida to fit the norms of a young woman in society. Young girls are turning to the princesses as role models and can be influenced by the way that they look. I think that Disney should not try to alter the appearance of this princess. In fact, they have put out a statement saying that this image will only be used for the princess's "coronation" into the group of current princesses. It is hard to believe this is true considering that their website contains the redesigned images as official ones of the other ten princesses.
Why do you believe that Disney is redesigning this princess to look a certain way? Why can't the morals of a story speak for themselves?

Too Fat to Ride in NY?

In a blog post that I wrote in October called Junk Food in NY Hospitals?, I discussed Mayor Bloomberg of New York City and his goal to ban unhealthy foods in hospitals. As Mayor, he has focused a lot on improving health of citizens including banning soda. One of his newer initiatives is instituting a bike-share program throughout the city that would allow anyone to rent a bike. This seems like a great idea to not only keep people in shape but also does not harm the environment. Overall, I have no problems with this program except for the weight restriction.

I read an article that described the criticism that Bloomberg is receiving for the restrictions on the program. He says that anyone over 260 lb is not allowed to rent a bike. It is strange that he would implement this kind of rule if his main goal is to make the population healthier. To me, it is great that someone who is overweight wants to get healthier by riding a bike. This program is not embracing these types of people and would only be catering to those  that are already more in shape. The restriction would be understandable if it were for safety reasons but according to the article, "several bike-shop owners agreed that the weight limit was bogus". But, safety is the upmost priority within a program that is as widespread as this one so I can understand where the Mayor is coming from. I still think that anyone who want to ride a bike should be allowed to do so and that the program should adapt to people of different sizes.

 Some Americans are known to have obesity problems and politicians are striving to make changes in our society to lessen the reach of the epidemic. As I have mentioned before, Mayor Bloomberg is a prime example of a politician who is doing just this. He is so motivated and willing to make changes but needs to rethink aspects of this program in particular. How can he expect Americans to change if their own motivations are not considered?

Prom in Black and White

During this time of the year, many high school students across the nation are preparing for Prom. For many, this night will be a memorable time to share with friends. But, what if you couldn't spend prom together with all of your friends? I read an article that talked about a rural county in Georgia where a high school has two separate proms: one for White students and the other for African-American students. To give you an idea of how serious this separation is, one student remarked that,"if you're an African-American and you show up to the white prom, you'll probably get asked to leave". In this day in age, it is almost impossible to imagine any place, especially a school, continuing to segregate students. The article explained that since the prom is private and is not a school event, it is organized by the parents and students and held off campus. Therefore, two separate proms are allowed to be held without any lawsuits toward the school. What I found interesting is that many of the students are now in favor of holding one prom that would be integrated but the only thing holding them back are their parents. The parents are more interested in maintaining the tradition than moving into the 21st century. But, this year they will be holding their first integrated prom.

I could not wrap my mind around the idea that there was segregation still apparent in the United States to this extent. I find the conflict between the tradition and modernity very interesting in this case. The parents want things to be the way that they used to be while their kids would rather move foreword. This story became a national focus because the students created a Facebook page so that they could raise money and awareness for an integrated prom. This shows the dedication that these kids had to create change, and they were successful.

Afraid of Death? Tylenol May Help

As I have been working on my Junior Theme, I have been thinking a lot about the American mentality of popping a pill to fix any and every problem. For my Junior Theme, I am researching the increase in antidepressant usage in the United States. I recently found an article that describes new research that suggests that a component of the household medication, Tylenol, may help ease some peoples anxiety about death. The researchers believe that Tylenol, a pain reliever, can also be used to relieve psychological pain rather than just physical. They found that, "these anxieties may be processed as "pain" by the brain". Since Tylenol is proven to work as a physical pain reliever, they found that it can successful in reducing "pain" that the brain interprets from anxieties about death.

To me, this is just another representation of how Americans want to find a cure for nearly every problem in life. Consumers would find it appealing knowing that a cure is right within their reach, probably at easy access in their medicine cabinets at that very moment. This new finding worries me because it makes me think about what other psychological problems, even some that seem not very severe like this one, can be fixed with simple medications. Furthermore, this begs the question about our society and the values that we posses. Is a "quick fix"really the solution to every medical problem?

Mental Illness Affects More Than You Would Think

For my Junior Theme, I am researching the rise of prescriptions of antidepressants. I have identified a few key factors to support my thesis but I was completely unaware of this new statistic. I read an article that talked about the estimate that fifty percent of the American population will suffer from a mental illness sometime in their lifetime. I did not realize that it could really be this high. According to the fifth edition of the DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, or better known as the bible for psychiatrists that is published by the American Psychiatric Association, the rate will truly be this high. I have found through my research that there is a lot of stigma surrounding mental illness. This could be reason why I was surprised that half of the population will have one; because it is not generally a topic that arrises in casual conversation. One reason for the rise could be that the DSM is always adding new diseases to every edition so it is easier for doctors to classify more characteristics as mental illness than before. Also, doctors have become better at detecting these mental illnesses because of newer technology.

I think that American society needs to somehow lessen the stigma that surrounds mental disorders. If this statistic really is true, then it is more than likely that you or someone that you love will have a mental illness. People will need support and it will be more difficult to receive it if there is not a change in understanding within our society.

Profiting from Injury?

If you have been keeping up with the NCAA Tournament, you are probably aware of the horrific injury that happened to Univeristy of Louisville's player, Kevin Ware. It has become a topic of discussion for many of my peers because of the grotesque nature of the injury. I found an article that talked about a campaign by Adidas and Louisville in which they are making T-shirts with the slogan "Ri5e To The Occasion"(the number 5 signifies the number on Ware's jersey). At first glance, this seems like a great tactic to raise money for Ware and the expensive medical fees that he will have to pay. To my surprise, as I read further in the article, I found out that none of the profits from the T-shirts go to Ware. I think that this is absolutely ridicuolous that they would not give any of the money to the person that actually deserves it.The rationale for this is that, "college athletes are prohibited from receiving money for their efforts" and profits from a T-shirt would be no exception from this rule. This means that the NCAA, Adidas and his university are profiting from his injury.The shirt was created as a respectful tribute that fans could engage in but it does not seem right that the corporation is making money from the misfortune of someone.

This instance is an prime example of the marketing that plays a major role in our society. Many people would have the same initial reaction that I did and purchase the T-shirt to help (financially) support Kevin Ware. But, they are unknowingly giving all of their money to Adidas and the university. I think this also speaks to the control that large institutions such as universities and companies possess.They have strong reputations and are able to boost their public appearance if they "support" a cause such as this one. Do you think that the actions of Adidas and the university are ethical?

Protesting for Persepolis

Over the weekend, I picked up the Chicago Tribune (a rarity considering I usually access news online) and on the front page a found an article about some Chicago Public Schools banning a book. The book that they are banning is called "Persepolis". It is a graphic novel that details what it was like for a woman to grow up during the Iranian Revolution. The book is usually read in the seventh grade. It is a terrible thing that the school wants to ban a book but what is even more intriguing is how the students are reacting. After hearing the news that the school was planning on banning a book that was a vital part of their middle school years, students began to vent on social media sites. Furthermore, they checked out all of the copies of this book in the library in order to "preserve" the book.

The students organized a protest on Friday afternoon to show their frustration with the district officials who are planning on banning Persepolis. Something interesting in the article was the detail that "many of the student's signs were made from old posters used by teachers during their strike last year".  (Chicago Tribune). To me this is very symbolic of the will in everyone to stand up for what they believe in, both teacher and student alike. The students were taking direct action, which is something I feel is very rare for this generation. In response to the protest, a Social Studies teacher at the school said,"I tell my students all the time, this is what education is all about. You don't learn just so you can take a test. You learn so you can change the world. They are actually doing that now". This teacher is highlighting important values in American education that often get lost in the weekly tasks that students have to accomplish. In the moment, students feel like their main goal is to ace the test and sometimes that is what teachers are best prepared to teach. But the true enlightening lessons stem from experiences that can impact the world. The students are not only learning how to speak up for what they believe in but making an impact through their leadership.

Magazine Cover Promotes Age Old Stereotypes

Today I found an article that exemplifies many of the issues that we have been discussing in class about race. The article was actually a response to a magazine cover that many people found to be racist. The cover (right) belongs to a highly acclaimed financial magazine, Bloomberg Businessweek. This cover art depicts a home overflowing with money and four people sitting inside the house. The four people all appear to be minorities, either Latino or African American. When the drawing is viewed in relation to the title, "The Great American Housing Rebound", it still doesn't quite make sense. I would expect that the article would be talking about how minorities are helping to improve the housing market but instead the article talks about the housing market in Phoenix which I would assume readers are supposed to contextualize is a city filled with minorities. Other than this, the cover of the magazine seems very irrelevant.

What stood out to me when I first saw the cover was the expression of the African American man in the lower right hand corner. His exaggerated features and crazed look eerily reminded me of the 20th century cartoon clips and posters that we viewed in class a few weeks ago. Dedrick Muhammad, a senior director of economics at the NAACP said that,"[the drawing] still puts forth a historically racist depiction that minorities are out grabbing money and benefiting from it". Muhammad seems to illuminate an unspoken fear that the white majority seems to hold against many minorities in America. There always seems to be a new (minority) group to blame for the problems in the country.

In order to combat the criticism, the magazine's editor wrote an apology that said, "Our cover illustration last week got strong reactions,which we regret. Our intention was not to incite or offend. If we had to do it over again, we'd do it differently"(Politico). Obviously, the magazine did not intend to be present a racist imagine but their apology could not seem any less heartless to me. The editor never outright says that the magazine regretted publishing the image but rather that they regret the "strong reactions" that will now taint the name of their magazine. Instances like these make me wonder how far our society has come from the racist beliefs of the past. I am confident that racism still exists but with little "mistakes" like this one, the hope of progression may never be fulfilled in our lifetimes.

The Best Picture Goes To...Michelle Obama?

Last night, my family and I, like millions of Americans tuned in to the Acadamy Awards. By 10:30, our patience had dwindled down to almost nothing while waiting for the biggest award, Best Picture, to be revealed. We were quite surprised to see the screen turn to our first lady Michelle Obama in a beautiful gown in the White House with the envelope. I was confused at first as to why SHE was presenting the award considering that it is usually some famous actor. By this time, we had put it together that she would undoubtedly be mixing in politics into the Oscars. I found an article from the Washington Post that talked about the backlash that she received from her surprise appearance  Obama's message was about how important the arts are. This message seemed to tie in perfectly with the overall theme of the Oscars.

Her controversial guest appearance could not go without criticism. Many critics said that it was not her place to be; that The First Lady should not have been in Hollywood at all. Also, it was interesting that the video with Michelle Obama at the White House also included military personell standing behind her. If she had just been talking about the arts and there were no military personell in the background, there still would have been backlash but I don't think that some people would have had such an intense reaction to her seemingly harmless presence. This whole incident seemed to remark on the idea of separation  Some Americans did not feel comfortable with mixing politics and their entertainment. I would argue that even the television and movies that we see everyday may in fact contain commentary about our society and can relate to politics. Do you think that Michelle's appearance at the Oscars was out of line?

NRA Aiming at a Surprisingly Young Audience

Recently there has been even more attention on the issue of gun laws because of tragedies that have swept the nation like the Sandy Hook School shooting. The most well known proponents of keeping gun rights is the NRA (National Rifle Association). According to this article, the NRA has released an iPhone app that is targeted at a younger audience. This app called "Practice Range" it is quite self explanatory considering that the app consists of virtual shooting ranges. What is even more remarkable is that the app is rated for ages 4+ in the App Store. Of course there are countless shooting games that exist primarily in video game form and many of these are rated mature( ages 17 and up). The difference is though that the shooting video games are often very gory and brutal whereas the purpose of the app is,"[to] instill safe and responsible ownership through fun challenges and realistic situations. It strikes the right balance of gaming and safety education, allowing you to enjoy the most authentic experience possible"according to an NRA spokesperson. The use of the word "authentic" already does not sit well in my mind. Even if the game does not include shooting people, it is supposed to simulate shooting a target. Does the NRA really believe this content is alright for 4 year olds? I do have to adress that in my community, I feel like people are very close minded and may not understand when it comes to gun rights. Many people around here do not practice shooting as a sport and only see the negatives. By putting this app in the market, the NRA is not promoting violence rather a sport or a hobby. Do you think the NRA was out of line by releasing this app?

A Muslim As Your "Average" American?

Recently in class we have been discussing the massive influence that Superbowl commercials have. These commercials themselves are watched almost as closely as the game. This whole conversation got me thinking about the power of TV advertising. I read this article from the New York Times that described a (non-superbowl) commercial that had a unique "twist". The Prudential advertisement was for its retirement plan in the "Day One" campaign. The campaign follows real people on "day one" of their retirement. The commercial featured a normal American man who was embarking on his first day of retirement after his career of 19 years. This man is seen enjoying "normal"American pastimes such as fishing with his grandchildren and sitting down to a wholesome family meal. The name of the man is Mujahid Abdul-Rashid; and yes he is Muslim.
The commerical is presenting this Muslim-American in a way that nearly every American of his age could relate to. Instead of being seen as a "threat to national security" as, we hate to believe it but, many stereotypes make him out to be, he is in a position that allows for him to be seen as a "normal" American. Mr. Abdul Rashid commented on the fact that being Muslim got him the commercial by saying, "I'd never thought about the ad in those terms, because the thrust of the commercial had nothing to do with my religion whatsoever"(New York Times). Can this really be true? I feel like the American people are trying to become more accepting of Muslims and seeing a commercial with a Muslim categorized as a "normal" American would only enhance this process. In other words, this commercial seems like a way of sending a message about the way American society should be. The commercial presented a strong man who was not afraid of his identity. Does this not sound like a definition of American to you?

Academic Freedom

I recently read an article that reminded me a lot of a topic that we discussed in the beginning of the year relating to Civil Liberties. In this discussion, we debated if reciting "The Pledge of Allegiance" (that mentions God) was obstructing the American ideal of Separation of Church and State. The article that I read talked about how four states are considering new legislation about teaching the theory of evolution in science classes and also bringing up God in the creation story. What initially struck me was that, according to the article, "the proposed laws were framed around the concept of "academic freedom". The phrase "academic freedom" seems so vague. Is this insinuating that in order to have "academic freedom" some religious explanation is required?

The main root of this argument is that teachers are struggling to find enough scientific evidence of Evolution and Creation so in an attempt to clarify these concepts with the students, they will teach from a religious perspective. This is  understandable reasoning but many critics think that this would be going outside of the boundaries of the basic public school institutions that can only exist if there is no clash between Church and State. Many critics also fear that this legislation could lead to a rise in the Creationist form of teaching in schools. In case you do not know the term, Creationism is the religious belief that the world was created by a supernatural being. The Public Education System has had a difficult time drawing the line between religious beliefs and scientific evidence when dealing with controversial topics such as Evolution or Creation. The Public Education System would like to keep it's purely science based curriculum but it is a challenge to remain purely base on evidence when teachers feel like their students are not grasping these certain concepts and have a lot of unanswerable questions. Do you think that these laws, if passed, could impact the future of the Public Education System?

Final Exam: Voting in the Dark

Natural Disasters have always rattled our nation. I remember the devastation of Hurricane Katrina when I was younger and much more recently, Hurricane Sandy. When searching for my artifact, I came across this image that I think represents the media’s view on the superstorm. I believe that this photograph is an important contemporary American artifact because it portrays the theme of resilience. 

This picture shows a woman in New York preparing to vote but there is no power so the Election Official is using a headlamp to see the ballots. It is important to note that the woman is elderly in the picture because oftentimes, the elderly are seen as weak. Instead, this woman is coming out to vote even though she may face hardships because of the storm. Another interesting detail is the light that only appears to shine on the emergency ballots. To me, this represents the true importance of having a voice even in times of disaster. I think the caption below is also worth examining. It says, “Election Official Christina Fox uses a headlamp to illuminate emergency ballots and check voters in while shivering in the dark on Nov. 6, 2012 in Yorktown, N.Y.” The use of the word “shivering” makes the viewer feel pain for these people and also shows that they are pushing through.

This image reminded me of Kurt Vonnegut's explanation of the redemptive arc in his short story titled “Here is a Lesson in Creative Writing”. He explains, “[The story]: Somebody gets into trouble, gets out of it again. It’s not accidental that the line ends up higher than where it began”(Vonnegut 349). In the case of Hurricane Sandy, I believe this can be used as a model to understand the reaction of the American public. This story would go:People on the East Coast were affected, there were power outages, damage, and death but the media is portraying the positive end by showing that the people are resilient by coming out to vote. In other words, their voices are not being silenced by the storm. In the picture, the elderly woman provides an “encouraging ending” to the public because of her perseverance.

Another connection I saw was to William James story, “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omalas”. In the story, the main question is if a society should give up the happiness of one for the happiness of others. Of the one unhappiness, “They all know it is there, all the people of Omalas. Some of them have come to see it,others are content merely to know it is there(James 282). To me, this can be interpreted as the American public (happiness) and those affected by Sandy(unhappiness). Many people donated money to aid them yet what more could have been done? Americans may think this is not my problem. The woman sitting at the table checking in voters exemplifies the idea of helping out and she has walked away from Omalas.

This image can be further explained by Molly Klare’s blogpost titled “The Nation by Storm” She writes,” I would say an American value is to tough things out…Americans in general are hardheaded. Ever since people came to America and had to make it on their own, they have been making it anyway they could”.The people who continued to go out to vote in areas affected by Sandy are “toughing things out” and want to show that they are resilient. The media goes out of its way to show positive problem solving through this picture rather than continuing to focus on pictures of the wreckage that is usually associated with the storm.

Helicopter Parents

A literal interpretation of Helicopter Parents

As second semester of Junior year rapidly approaches, myself and many of my peers are beginning to feel the pressure of the college search. As cheesy as this may sound, for many of us, college will be a time where we can embark on a new chapter of our lives (away from our parents at last!) But what would you do if you felt like your parents were interfering too much on your "new life"?

A few days ago, my dad showed me an article that he wanted to hear my take on. The article described how a college student, Aubrey Ireland, felt that her parents were too involved in her life that she actually won a court case that put a restraining order on her parents. According to the article, Aubrey's parents set up tracking software on her phone and computer to see who she had been talking to and what sites she was visiting. Already, this seems a little bit ridiculous. The student is an adult, living away from home so why should her parents feel the need to monitor her every action? If this isn't enough, her parents would also drive nearly 600 miles from their home to arrive unannounced at the college and go to some of their daughters theater performances. The parents justified their actions by saying that they were worried that Aubrey was using illegal drugs,was being promiscuous, and was having mental issues. Aubrey denied these allegations and said that everything was under control. She wanted to experience life on her own and if she were to make the wrong decisions, then the consequences would fall on her.

As Americans, I feel like our society puts a large emphasis on privacy. Everyone has the right to keep information or parts of their lives hidden, This case is especially interesting because it deals with the relationship between parents and child. These helicopter parents seem to have good intentions but where should the line be drawn?

Where is it Needed Most?

During the holiday season, there is a sense of joy and happiness that seems to flow around. People often reflect upon their actions in the past year that is coming to an end. With these thoughts, during the holiday season especially, people make an effort to help the less fortunate and give to charity. But how should one decide where to give? There are so many causes out there that it can often be difficult to sift through and find the "most important ones". I was reading an opinion piece in the Chicago Tribune whose author thinks that American's donations should be given to the many people in poverty in developing countries  rather than giving to institutions at home in the United States.

The first question that arose when I read this article was, What about the people in the United States who are in poverty? The author, Peter Singer, argues that we should give to people in extreme poverty. "Extreme poverty, as defined by the World Bank, means living on less than $1.25 a day"(Singer). This number is much more common in developing countries than in the United States, because it is a relatively rich country, so therefore less of the population is in this intense situation of need here. Although his reasoning seems to be logical, I feel like Americans who are donating money should first consider problems in their own country rather than those across the Atlantic. The author argues this again by saying that people should give where they would have the most impact; developing countries.

I do agree with Singer that money should be given to more direct causes rather than already wealthy institutions. The example he brings up is one that I think about as well. Singer is a professer at Princeton where a vast majority of the student body was exposed to an excellent education and he does not always see the importance of giving to an institution that is already thriving when he could give his money elsewhere to places that could give as many children possible at least some form of an education. From this example, Singer is saying that he would prefer to donate where the need is greatest. Do you think that there are some causes that are more deserving than others? How would you decide what causes are the most needy?

Is Autism to Blame?

By now, almost every person in the United States has heard about the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School that took the lives of 26. This tragedy has appeared to overwhelm the country with talks of increased gun control and better security measures in schools. Although gun control is a huge topic and one that is of utmost importance, I feel that another topic related to the shooting is not receiving enough focus. I was reading an article that mentioned the recent spike of hate towards children with Autism. You may be wondering how this can possibly be related to the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. Well,the shooter (Adam Lanza) was diagnosed with a form of Asperger's. This condition is on the Autism Spectrum but at the very low end so therefore is not very severe. People with Asperger's often exhibit social awkwardness but can still function rather normally. On the other hand, people with extreme Autism may have impairments in their communication. In Lanza's case, his form was not extreme but still played a major role in his life.

People were quick to assume that one of the reasons for Lanza's violent actions were related to his Autism but advocates of organizations like "Autism Speaks" are trying to get the message across that this is not the case. The President of Autism Speaks recently wrote a statement that reads,"Several media outlets are reporting that the shooter might have had an autism spectrum disorder. Some have also inaccurately reported that there is a linkage between autism and planned violence. We ask that blame not be placed on people with disabilities or disorders in the midst of these types of tragedies". True to her words, many doctors have agreed upon the fact that Autism is not related to this type of violence. So why then are Americans so quick to blame this disease? I think that a possibility is that with such a tragic event like this one, people do not want to sit with the feeling of an unknown cause and want to find a scapegoat.

In relation to this misleading assumption, there have recently been concerns that more children with Autism will be bullied. Students may  falsely identify the link between Autism and violence and would further exclude these kids from school life. This study found that 46 percent of middle school and high school students with Autism have reported being bullied. These students are already "easy" targets and now with this new association tacked on, it seems as though children with this disability will never be able to escape a cycle of exclusion. Advocates of Autism awareness organizations feel that teachers should better educate students about the condition. To what extent do you think this would help the situation? Do you think this raises an even bigger question about the American's desire to blame?

Tackling Childhood Obesity...On TV?

The three kids and trainers on The Biggest Loser

Many of us are familiar with the rising problem of childhood obesity in the United States. Organizations and political leaders are taking charge of this issue in a variety of ways. For example, First Lady Michelle Obama with the Let's Move Campaign and the NFL with their Play 60 initiative. Both of these campaigns, and many others, strive to put an end to childhood obesity by encouraging children to be active and eat healthy. American's spotlight on obesity does not end with these campaigns. 

In 2004, NBC debuted a show called The Biggest Loser. In the show, obese contestants compete to lose the highest percentage of their body weight (when compared to their initial). In other words, the show is supposed to act as a competition to become healthy. This reality show has been criticized as promoting unrealistic rates of weight loss. The contestants live in a ranch for the duration of the show and their primary focus is on losing weight and learning to eat healthier. In the real world, a person could not commit that long of a period of time (and energy) for weight loss. 

For the next season starting in January, there will be a new aspect to the show. Besides the return of one of the most well known trainers on the show, Jillian Michaels, three teens from the ages of 13-17 will be featured. One article talks about the addition of the new members by saying, "With childhood obesity at an all-time high, jeopardizing the health of kids and future generations, The Biggest Loser is committed to fighting this epidemic by featuring children to serve as ambassadors for change who can inspire kids all over the country to get healthy"(NBC). The children will "serve as ambassadors" because instead of living in the ranch and doing weekly weigh-ins, they can continue their lives at home but will be able to lose weight and in the process will inspire others. Also, NBC is trying to reach a wider and more diverse audience with the teens. I think that this is a great idea but it makes me wonder if it is really the best for kids struggling with their weight to be put in the national spotlight. NBC has adressed these concerns by saying that these kids are already being bullied about their weight and this show would serve as a support system for them and their families. Do you think that it is alright to have children participate in this show? What other issues could arise from this?

Shortage of U.S. Pilots

The airport has become a much less enjoyable place to be in recent years because of higher security measures and also unavoidable weather delays. Another problem is soon to be affecting air travel in the United States that most people are unaware of. I was reading an article that was talking about the shortage of pilots in U.S. airlines. The article explained that one of the reasons is because the requirements for being a pilot are starting to become stricter. For example, Federal Mandates will be put into effect next year that require pilots to have at least 1,500 hours of flying experience which is six times more than previously needed. I think that this is in theory is a great idea that would ensure that pilots really know how to fly but that time is a huge investment! I remember how long it felt to get fifty hours in order to  be eligible for my drivers license so 1,500 hours would feel like a lifetime. Therefore, Aviation Schools will have to spend more money and wait a longer time to send out new pilots. This is an issue because according to the Wall Street Journal, "more than half of American pilots are over age 50"and many of them will be retiring soon. Furthermore, studies project that Airlines will need to hire nearly 50,000 pilots in the next ten years in order to keep up with the wave of pilots that will be retiring.

When first reading the article, I did not understand why there are not enough pilots. I remembered hearing about cuts in the pay of pilots earlier this year and realized that this could make the job less appealing to prospective pilots. Because of these pay cuts, some American pilots are moving overseas to fly planes for other foreign airlines that pay better. Also, the job is rather demanding because the pilot is away from home most of the time. Why else do you think that there is a shortage of pilots? How would this affect the availability of flights in the coming years? Do you think that the media is making this problem seem bigger than it really is?

The Disney Princesses and Diversity

Almost all of us are familiar with the Disney princesses and their tales. Cinderella the poor girl with an evil stepmother and stepsisters who gets her wish to go to the ball and meet her prince charming, Ariel the mermaid who just wants to abandon her life as a mermaid and live happily ever after with her prince...just to name a few. One of the things that I noticed when thinking about the princesses is how racially undiverse they are. The majority of them are white while Jasmine, Mulan, Pocahontas, and much more recently, Tiana are the ones that are of different ethnicities. I must clear up the fact that many of these princesses were not created by Americans (or in that case Disney as well) but were adapted from fairy tales by Grimms or Hans Christian Anderson, or others too. The last princesses that were added to the "Disney Clan" were the ones mentioned before, the non-white ones. The first one added was Jasmine in 1992 while the first princess, Snow White was shown in feature film in 1937. After the release of Snow White, four more were to follow before a different ethnicity was added. Why did it take so long to add princesses of different ethnicities? Right now, there is a pretty solid ratio of white to non white princesses but this makes me wonder if Disney would have thought something like this would happen back in 1932.

More recently though, I was reading an article that described Disney's plan to release a new princess named Sofia. She will be the first Latina princess and she will be featured in a movie called, "Sofia the First: Once Upon a Time", and have a spin off television show on the Disney Channel and Disney Junior. The major contreversy stems from the fact that critics do not think she is being portrayed as "Latina enough" to really embrace the ethnicity. One of their main concerns is that her mother's complexion is much darker than Sofia's. Unlike Sofia, the mother appears to look more Latina than her. How come the princess is not this color? It took Disney long enough to come out with princesses of different ethnicities but they eventually took the ethnicity to the extreme. They tried to incorporate cultural situations and educate young girls with Jasmine, Mulan, Pocahantas, and Tiana. How come they are not going all the way with embodying the culture of the Latinos?

I think that it could be linked to the current American views towards Latinos. Many Americans are uneducated about different types of people and are quick to make assumptions and judgements. The other racially diverse princesses were not introduced when there was a direct discrimination towards that ethnicity. Sofia, on the other hand, is trying to be a  representative for the growing number of latinos in the country. All in all, I feel that Disney is trying to do good by introducing a Latina princess but I am disappointed in how poorly they are portraying the different ethnicity. What do you think this shows about American attitudes toward equality and inclusion?

Math and Science?

Earlier this week, I was watching the third presidential debate when I heard President Obama talk about the importance of math and science teachers. He said," What I now want to do is to hire more teachers, especially in math and science, because we know that we've fallen behind when it comes to math and science. And those teachers can make a difference."(the full transcript of the third debate can be viewed here). This same topic had been brought to my attention in earlier debates when President Obama talked about this same issue. I think that it is interesting that he would pinpoint this issue of education to focus on.

I am aware that the United States is well behind other countries in terms of math and science education so that is why Obama is striving for improvement in this particular area. If the United States is lacking in cutting edge math and science, then the nation will not be able to compete with other countries  This idea was also brought up in an article about Obama's stress on this issue. I think it is saying something about the goals of our country by mentioning math and science, not other subjects like english, history, arts, or foreign language. Obviously, the president does not disregard the importance of these other subjects but there is a message he wants to portray by just emphasizing two of them. This makes me wonder if other countries are the most concerned about math and science as well or if it is just the United States. What do you think?