multicultural-psychology

Reflection Summary

Sat, 05 Dec 2015 23:27:10 +0100

My experience throughout the class and blog process has been liberating. I remember the first day of class when we were asked to list what culture is. I instantly thought of ethnicity and religion but I struggled to think of any further words. I was surprised as the class continued to shout out different words such as politics, traditions, SES, gender, etc. I soon realized how ignorant I was to the meaning of culture. Unfortunately, I also realized how ignorant I was to my own culture. I remember the class being asked, “What is your culture?” I responded to myself as thinking that there is not much to my culture, or me I am merely a white, upper middle class white American female. Through the case study assignment, I was required to look further into my Self from the eyes of a stranger. In the beginning, I found the interview process to be slightly uncomfortable, however throughout the process I was intrigued at the many things a stranger could define in me just by the information given and interviews with my close family members. I learned that there is more to me than what meets the eye.
My experience constructing my blog throughout the semester was an enlightening experience. I was unaware of the many topics and issues that are currently going on in the world. I realized that culture is an ongoing development that will never just simply disappear. In particular, culture is an ever-growing aspect for everyone; we are constantly evolving and are becoming more loquacious in our expectations for equality.
During the course of the semester, I have noticed on issues that would cause confliction and deliberation were not as vocalized throughout the class; it appeared to me that we as a class looked at the harmonious aspects of issues rather than bringing up conversations for debate. With that aside, I have learned a great deal from the first day of class. I have learned there is more to me than I had originally thought. Furthermore, I have learned there is more to other people than what is first perceived. I have grown a deeper appreciation for people and their culture. Furthermore, this class has pushed me to reach outside of my comfort zone and expand my perspectives towards diverse common issues that are becoming more apparent in our world today.

Mormen Leaders Stand Behind Rules For Gays, Their Children

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 07:26:10 +0100

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — The Mormon church is standing behind its new rules targeting gay members and their children that generated widespread blowback from members, while providing more explanation about the policy changes and clarifying exactly what they mean.
The rules issued last week are designed to protect kids, following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ's "tender love of children," officials with The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints said in a news release Friday.
"Church leaders want to avoid putting little children in a potential tug-of-war between same-sex couples at home and teachings and activities at church," according to the release posted online.
The rules ban baptisms for children living with gay parents until they turn 18, disavow same-sex relationships and get approval from global church leaders. They also make gay marriages a sin worthy of expulsion.
The gay marriage policy wasn't surprising since church leaders have made clear their doctrinal opposition to such relationships. But the guidelines for children marked a jarring shift from the religion's recent push to carve out a more compassionate stance on LGBT issues.
They prompted a flurry of discussion on Mormon websites, with the idea of targeting kids ruffling even conservative Latter-day Saints who rarely question church decisions.
After the U.S. Supreme Court's decision last summer to make gay marriage legal nationwide, church leaders wanted "to draw a firm line and encourage consistency among local leaders," the news release said.
The church clarified that the rules apply only to children living primarily with same-sex couples.
Nathan Kitchen, a gay Mormon father of five, said that gives him hope his children will be allowed to keep enjoying all the faith's privileges.
Though the church didn't specifically address joint custody like Kitchen has with his ex-wife, he thinks the clarification gives his local church leader discretion to avoid implementing the rules against his children.
That will be a major relief to all his kids, especially his 15-year-old son, who worried he might not be able to serve a mission. Two-year missions spent proselyting in other states and countries are a rite of passage for young men in the faith.
"I can't wait to pick them up from school and let them know that they don't have to move out and they don't have to disavow their father's relationship," said Kitchen, a 47-year-old dentist from Gilbert, Arizona, who came out as gay about two years ago. "I feel some joy now and much less anxiety for my kids."
But that clarifications may also lead to bitter custody battles where straight spouses will fight even harder for primary custody to protect their children from being targeted due to a gay parent, said Spencer Clark, executive director of Mormons for Equality, an LGBT support group.
Mormon officials also said children who have already been baptized or given priesthood duties — a common action for young Mormon boys — will not have those rescinded. For children of gay parents who have already notched those milestones, decisions about whether to grant them the next ordinances in the chain will be made by local leaders with the best interest of the child in mind.
Local leaders are encouraged to ask for guidance from senior leaders when situations fall outside the new guidelines, the church said.
They clarified that while children of gay parents won't be given the full spectrum of ordinances, they aren't barred from attending worship services.
"All children are to be treated with utmost respect and love. They are welcome to attend church meetings and participate in church activities," said a letter signed by Mormon church president Thomas S. Monson and his top two counselors.
Troy Williams, a former Mormon and executive director of a prominent Utah LGBT group called Equality Utah, said he's grateful the church responded to all the pain the rule changes caused. But, he said the group still considers it "incredibly cruel" that the church is forcing children of gay parents to disavow their parents' sexuality.
A group that had been organizing a protest over the new rules said Friday it plans to go forward with the event. More than 500 people are expected at the protest Saturday in Salt Lake City.
Religions that reject same-sex marriage are just starting to wrestle with how they should address the children of gay spouses and how much the families can be included in church life — if at all.
Earlier this year, Pope Francis said in a sermon that Roman Catholic priests should not refuse baptism to anyone who seeks the sacrament. Still, bishops are the top authorities in their dioceses and can make such decisions on their own.
Some U.S. bishops have fired diocesan employees in same-sex marriages, or refused to enroll the children of gay parents in parish schools, saying their presence would compromise the church's ability to provide clear moral teaching on homosexuality.
Among conservative Protestants, many denominations are structured in a way that gives broad discretion to individual congregations, so no overarching policies are in place.
For the past several years, the Utah-based Mormon church, which reports 15 million members worldwide, has tried to walk a delicate tightrope of becoming more gay-friendly while holding onto its belief that God intended marriage to be exclusively between a man and a woman. Leaders gave multiple speeches preaching a "fairness for all" approach that encourages compassion for gays while protecting religious liberties.
The church backed a landmark Utah state law passed this year that added anti-discrimination protection for LGBT people while shielding religious rights.
Mormon leaders said the rules for children target a narrow group since very few married gay couples want their children blessed and baptized in the church.
They said the church is "holding firm to the doctrinal position of right and wrong" and extending love to all while its leaders navigate the complexities of diverse societies and rapidly changing social circumstances.

Reflection

The rules issued towards the children of gay parents are designed to protect kids, following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ's "tender love of children.” What exactly are they protecting them from is what I would like to know? They are teaching them that we are not all children of God, as the LDS religion preaches. The LDS religion is discriminating against children who do not have a choice as to their parent’s choices. Do they think that if they refuse these gay couples children from religion that the parents are going to all of a sudden change their own way of being? No, these parents are living a life that they feel is right to them, and their children should not be punished for it. The article states, "Church leaders want to avoid putting little children in a potential tug-of-war between same-sex couples at home and teachings and activities at church”, so instead they are creating a tug-of-war (as they call it) between the child and their religion.

Education Gap Between Rich and Poor Is Growing Wider

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 07:13:45 +0100

The wounds of segregation were still raw in the 1970s. With only rare exceptions, African-American children had nowhere near the same educational opportunities as whites.

The civil rights movement, school desegregation and the War on Poverty helped bring a measure of equity to the playing field. Today, despite some setbacks along the way, racial disparities in education have narrowed significantly. By 2012, the test-score deficit of black 9-, 13- and 17-year-olds in reading and math had been reduced as much as 50 percent compared with what it was 30 to 40 years before.

Achievements like these breathe hope into our belief in the Land of Opportunity. They build trust in education as a leveling force powering economic mobility. “We do have a track record of reducing these inequalities,” said Jane Waldfogel, a professor of social work at Columbia University.

But the question remains: Why did we stop there?

“Each and every child, in each and every classroom, deserves a future that isn’t limited by their ZIP code,” Mayor Bill de Blasio said in a speech on Wednesday.News Analysis: De Blasio’s Plan to Lift Poor Schools Comes With High Costs and Big Political RisksSEPT. 16, 2015

New research shakes the long-held belief that higher education clears a path to financial equality for blacks and Hispanics, and contends that the problem is deeply rooted.Racial Wealth Gap Persists Despite Degree, Study Says. AUG. 16, 2015

For all the progress in improving educational outcomes among African-American children, the achievement gaps between more affluent and less privileged children is wider than ever, notes Sean Reardon of the Center for Education Policy Analysis at Stanford. Racial disparities are still a stain on American society, but they are no longer the main divider. Today the biggest threat to the American dream is class.

At Johnsonville Elementary School in Cameron, N.C., students participate in a unit of study based on college awareness. Credit Travis Dove for The New York Times

Education is today more critical than ever. College has become virtually a precondition for upward mobility. Men with only a high school diploma earn about a fifth less than they did 35 years ago. The gap between the earnings of students with a college degree and those without one is bigger than ever.

And yet American higher education is increasingly the preserve of the elite. The sons and daughters of college-educated parents are more than twice as likely to go to college as the children of high school graduates and seven times as likely as those of high school dropouts.

Only 5 percent of Americans ages 25 to 34 whose parents didn’t finish high school have a college degree. By comparison, the average across 20 rich countries in an analysis by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development is almost 20 percent.

The problem, of course, doesn’t start in college.

Earlier this week, Professor Waldfogel and colleagues from Australia, Canada and Britain published a new book titled “Too Many Children Left Behind” (Russell Sage). It traces the story of America’s educational disparities across the life cycle of its children, from the day they enter kindergarten to eighth grade.

Their story goes sour very early, and it gets worse as it goes along. On the day they start kindergarten, children from families of low socioeconomic status are already more than a year behind the children of college graduates in their grasp of both reading and math.

And despite the efforts deployed by the American public education system, nine years later the achievement gap, on average, will have widened by somewhere from one-half to two-thirds.

Even the best performers from disadvantaged backgrounds, who enter kindergarten reading as well as the smartest rich kids, fall behind over the course of their schooling.

The challenges such children face compared to their more fortunate peers are enormous. Children from low socioeconomic backgrounds are seven times more likely to have been born to a teenage mother. Only half live with both parents, compared with 83 percent of the children of college graduates.

The children of less educated parents suffer higher obesity rates, have more social and emotional problems and are more likely to report poor or fair health. And because they are much poorer, they are less likely to afford private preschool or the many enrichment opportunities — extra lessons, tutors, music and art, elite sports teams — that richer, better-educated parents lavish on their children.

When they enter the public education system, they are shortchanged again. Eleven-year-olds from the wrong side of the tracks are about one-third more likely to have a novice teacher, according to Professor Waldfogel and her colleagues. They are much more likely to be held back a grade, a surefire way to stunt their development, the researchers say.

Financed mainly by real estate taxes that are more plentiful in neighborhoods with expensive homes, public education is becoming increasingly compartmentalized. Well-funded schools where the children of the affluent can play and learn with each other are cordoned off from the shabbier schools teaching the poor, who are still disproportionally from black or Hispanic backgrounds.

Even efforts to lean against inequality backfire. Research by Rachel Valentino, who received her Ph.D. in education policy at Stanford University this year, found that public prekindergarten programs offered minorities and the poor a lower-quality education.

Perhaps pre-K programs serving poor and minority children have trouble attracting good teachers. Perhaps classrooms with more disadvantaged children are more difficult to manage. Perhaps teachers offer more basic instruction because disadvantaged children need to catch up. In any event, Ms. Valentino told me, “the gaps are huge.”

This is arguably education’s biggest problem. Narrowing proficiency gaps that emerge way before college would probably do more to increase the nation’s college graduation rate than offering universal community college, easier terms on student loans or more financial aid.

“If we could equalize achievement from age zero to 14,” Professor Waldfogel told me, “that would go a long way toward closing the college enrollment and completion gaps.”

It can be done. Australia, Canada — even the historically class-ridden Britain — show much more equitable outcomes.

The policy prescriptions go beyond improving teachers and curriculums, or investing in bringing struggling students up to speed. They include helping parents, too: teaching them best practices in parenting, raising their pay and helping them with the overlapping demands of work and family.

And yet the strains from our world of increasing income inequality raise doubts about our ability to narrow the educational divide. Poorer, less educated parents simply can’t keep up with the rich, who are spending hand over fist to ensure that their children end at the front of the rat race. Our public school system has proved no match to the forces reproducing inequality across the generations.

Fifty years ago, the black-white proficiency gap was one and a half to two times as large as the gap between a child from a family at the top 90th percentile of the income distribution and a child from a family at the 10th percentile, according to Professor Reardon at Stanford. Today, the proficiency gap between the poor and the rich is nearly twice as large as that between black and white children.

In other words, even as one achievement gap narrowed, another opened wide. That kind of progress could dash one’s hope in the leveling power of education.

Reflection

I appreciate the honesty of this article when it states that today the biggest threat to the American dream is class, and sadly, it is true. The gap between the earnings of students with a college degree and those without one is bigger than ever. Furthermore, it seems to me that a bachelor’s degree does not hold as much strength as it once did and to make a decent living these days you must strive for a masters or even a doctorate degree. “Each and every child, in each and every classroom, deserves a future that isn’t limited by their ZIP code”, is true. Unfortunately, as the article states “New research shakes the long-held belief that higher education clears a path to financial equality for blacks and Hispanics, and contends that the problem is deeply rooted. Racial Wealth Gap Persists Despite Degree.” Even though there is progress in improving educational outcomes among African-American children, the achievement gaps between more affluent and less privileged children is wider than ever. Why is this? Yes we are making strides to lessen the gap, but there should not be a gap in the first place.

Aziz Ansari on Acting, Race and Hollywood

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 06:42:05 +0100

Fisher Stevens was cooking dinner when I got him on the phone. I had wanted to talk to him for years because, as I recount in my new Netflix series, “Master of None,” this actor played a strange role in my relationship to television and film.

The first time I saw an Indian character in an American movie was “Short Circuit 2,” a 1988 film in which a humanized robot named Johnny 5 goes to New York and bonds with an Indian scientist named Benjamin Jarhvi.

Seeing an Indian character in a lead role had a powerful effect on me, but it was only as I got older that I realized what an anomaly it was. I rarely saw any Indians on TV or film, except for brief appearances as a cabdriver or a convenience store worker literally servicing white characters who were off to more interesting adventures. This made “Short Circuit 2” special. An Indian lead character? With a Caucasian love interest? In the 1980s? What’s going on here? A bold foray into diversity far ahead of its time?

Not exactly.

One day in college, I decided to go on the television and film website IMDB to see what happened to the Indian actor from “Short Circuit 2.” Turns out, the Indian guy was a white guy.

The character was played by Mr. Stevens, a Caucasian actor in brownface. Rather than cast an Indian actor, the filmmakers had Mr. Stevens sit every morning in a makeup chair and get painted an “Indian color” before going on set and doing his “Indian voice.”

As a child, I thought the villain of the film was Oscar Baldwin, the banker who tricks Johnny 5 into helping him commit a jewel heist. As an adult, I thought the bad guy was actually Mr. Stevens, who mocked my ethnicity.

And now, here I was, a real Indian man, talking to the actor who played a fake one almost 30 years ago.

After a long conversation, I can confirm Mr. Stevens is not a villain, but was, when he took the role, a well-intentioned if slightly misguided young actor who needed a job during a more culturally insensitive time.

At first, he was remarkably casual, cooking dinner as we talked, seemingly happy to recall his days with Johnny 5.

“Originally, the role of Benjamin was a white grad student, and then the director and co-writer of ‘Short Circuit’ changed the character to Indian,” he told me. They then went to Mr. Stevens and asked, “Can you play Indian?”

It was 1987, so we were all a little less savvy about the things we were doing that were actually hurtful to large groups of people, and the answer, for a 21-year-old struggling actor, was yes.

What surprised me was how seriously Mr. Stevens dedicated himself to “becoming Indian.” He went full Method, studying with a dialect coach, reading R. K. Narayan’s “The Guide” and Hesse’s “Siddhartha.” “I started taking yoga and immersed myself, because I really wanted to be as real as possible,” he said. He even lived in India for a month before shooting “Short Circuit 2.”

Mr. Stevens’s efforts to make the character real, and not a full-on ethnic cartoon, are admirable, despite the underlying insult of his being cast. Toward the end of the conversation, it seemed to fully hit him how insensitive his casting may have been, and he said several times that he believed the role should have been played by an Indian and that he would never take it today.

These days, Indian people, real Indian people, pop up way more in film and television, but fake Indians are still around more than you think. I loved “The Social Network,” but I have a hard time understanding why the Indian-American Harvard student Divya Narendra was played by Max Minghella, a half-Chinese, half-Italian British actor. More recently, “The Martian” was based on a novel with an Indian character named Venkat Kapoor, who in the film became Vincent, a character portrayed by Chiwetel Ejiofor, a British actor of Nigerian origin. (The Indian actor Irrfan Khan was reportedly in talks to take the role, but couldn’t because of a scheduling conflict.)

My efforts to get responses from people who made these decisions were unsuccessful. But I don’t want to judge them before knowing the full story, especially because I know that both films made at least some attempts to pursue Indian actors. I auditioned for “The Social Network,” and I was horrible. I tried to improvise and make the role funny. I was a young actor who didn’t understand what he was doing. I was also asked to audition for a part in “The Martian” (not Kapoor), but I skimmed the script and — no offense — it seemed like a boring movie about a white guy stuck on Mars for two hours who gets fired up about plants, so it didn’t seem worth taking a break from my own projects. (I’ve heard the film is fantastic.) So, I know the filmmakers made an effort to cast Indian actors, but how hard did they try?

I had to cast an Asian actor for “Master of None,” and it was hard. When you cast a white person, you can get anything you want: “You need a white guy with red hair and one arm? Here’s six of ’em!” But for an Asian character, there were startlingly fewer options, and with each of them, something was off. Some had the right look but didn’t have comedy chops. Others were too young or old. We even debated changing the character to an Asian woman, but a week before shooting began, Kelvin Yu, an actor from Los Angeles, sent in an audition over YouTube and got the part.

What? The guy from "Short Circuit 2" is not really Indian? As kids we would watch in awe that an Indian like us was on the big screen....

When I was growing up in the 1970s and 1980s, a time when there were relatively few Indians in the United States (due to immigration laws...

It's probably difficult to cast actors from minority groups because there just aren't as many out there as white folks. Minority parents are...

So I get it: Sometimes you’re in a jam. Every time I’ve played a part that required stunts, they’ve been done by a white stuntman who has had to brown up. In those cases, the ethics didn’t seem quite as dubious. Training an Indian to do the stunts wasn’t practical, and a stuntman is not mocking Indian people; he’s tricking people into thinking it’s me, a real Indian. (If there is a heartbroken Indian stuntman reading this now: Dude, I’m so sorry, and you really need to get a better stunt agent.)

But I still wonder if we are trying hard enough.

Even though I’ve sold out Madison Square Garden as a standup comedian and have appeared in several films and a TV series, when my phone rings, the roles I’m offered are often defined by ethnicity and often require accents.

Sure, things are moving in the right direction with “Empire” and “Fresh Off the Boat.” But, as far as I know, black people and Asian people were around before the last TV season. And whatever progress toward diversity we are making, the percentage of minorities playing lead roles is still painfully low. (The numbers for women are depressing as well.) In 2013, according to a recent report produced by the Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies at U.C.L.A., only 16.7 percent of lead film roles went to minorities. Broadcast TV was worse, with only 6.5 percent of lead roles going to nonwhites in the 2012-13 season. In cable, minorities did better, getting 19.3 percent of the roles.

For me, as a modern American consumer, these numbers come as zero surprise. Here’s a game to play: When you look at posters for movies or TV shows, see if it makes sense to switch the title to “What’s Gonna Happen to This White Guy?” (“Forrest Gump,” “The Martian,” “Black Mass”) or if there’s a woman in the poster, too, “Are These White People Gonna Have Sex With Each Other?” (“Casablanca,” “When Harry Met Sally,” “The Notebook”). Even at a time when minorities account for almost 40 percent of the American population, when Hollywood wants an “everyman,” what it really wants is a straight white guy. But a straight white guy is not every man. The “everyman” is everybody.

When we were looking for an Asian actor for “Master of None,” my fellow creator, Alan Yang, asked me: “How many times have you seen an Asian guy kiss someone in TV or film?” After a long hard think, we came up with two (Steven Yeun on “The Walking Dead” and Daniel Dae Kim on “Lost”). It made me realize how important it was not to give up on our search.

Reflection

When I began reading this article I assumed it was regarding a person of color playing a leading role in a movie “Short Circuit” from the 1980’s which was a rare thing at that point in time. However, I was very mistaken. In fact, the lead actor was in fact a Caucasian male who was ‘painted’ brown to look as though he was of Indian decent. The article states, “The character was played by Mr. Stevens, a Caucasian actor in brownface. Rather than cast an Indian actor, the filmmakers had Mr. Stevens sit every morning in a makeup chair and get painted an “Indian color” before going on set and doing his “Indian voice.” This shocked me. Why not cast an actual Indian male actor if that is what they were wanting?

Racial Anxiety May Alter Time Perception For Some White Americans

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 06:32:57 +0100

WASHINGTON — Time may appear to slow down for white Americans who feel threatened by an approaching black person, raising questions about the pervasive effects of racial bias or anxiety in the United States, according to research published by the American Psychological Association.

In a series of experiments, white adults viewed faces of white and black people who appeared to be moving toward them on a computer screen. Participants rated the apparent speed or approximate time that each face was on the screen and completed a survey that measured their anxiety when around people of a different race.

White participants who reported more racial anxiety perceived the approaching black faces as moving more slowly or appearing longer on the computer screen than the white faces. Although participants saw both male and female faces, there was no difference in observed effects based on gender. The same effects weren’t found when the black faces appeared to be moving farther away, possibly because they weren’t perceived as a threat, the study noted.

While racial bias has been alleged in many recent high-profile police killings of unarmed black men, the authors said this is the first study to demonstrate that racial anxiety may even temporarily alter the perception of time and motion. The study was published online in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General®.

“People tend to think that if you felt threatened, you’d think someone was approaching more quickly,” said lead researcher Andreana Kenrick, PhD. “But in the moment, the anxiety of the experience may cause heightened attention and time expansion where the passage of time seems to slow down, similar to car crash survivors who say the accident seemed to take place in slow motion.”

These contrasting findings were found in different experiments in the study, said Kenrick, a former postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University where the research was conducted. In one online experiment, 108 white U.S. residents were asked to imagine a white or black person moving toward them. Participants who reported higher levels of racial anxiety imagined that the black person was moving more quickly. However, in four other experiments where participants were shown images, whites who reported more racial anxiety perceived approaching black faces as moving more slowly than white faces in the present moment, possibly because of time expansion effects.

The experiments included a total of more than 500 white adults who were recruited online, at Princeton University or at a shopping mall in Lawrenceville, New Jersey. There was an almost even split between male and female participants, with varying ages. Since all of the participants were white, the study didn’t discern whether black people who report high levels of racial anxiety would experience similar effects for approaching whites.

The findings don’t necessarily mean that the participants who reported high levels of racial anxiety were racist or experienced implicit bias, Kenrick said. Those participants may have been unaccustomed to being around black people or fearful that they might be accused of being racist in an awkward encounter.

“The study is not necessarily measuring racial bias but some of the effects of discomfort around people of another race,” Kenrick said.

The study findings may have important practical implications, including inaccurate eyewitness identification and the misinterpretation of innocent actions by black people as threatening, Kenrick said. “If you perceive time as slowing down, then you may feel overconfident about identifying the approaching person later or interpreting their actions,” she said. “However, more research is needed to reach firm conclusions.”

Reflection

The study looked at the effects of discomfort around people of another race by having white adults view faces of white and black people who appeared to be moving toward them on a computer screen. Participants rated the apparent speed or approximate time that each face was on the screen and completed a survey that measured their anxiety when around people of a different race. The findings do not necessarily mean that the participants who reported high levels of racial anxiety were racist or experienced implicit bias, stating that those participants may have been unaccustomed to being around black people or fearful that they might be accused of being racist in an awkward encounter. This brings up a topic in our multicultural textbook that states that discrimination and experienced racism leads to stress causing hypertension. Not only are those who are being respondents of racism report feeling stress, but those who are a victim of racism do as well.

Ireland to 'decriminalise' small amounts of drugs, including heroin, cocaine and cannabis, for ...

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 05:03:14 +0100

Ireland will move towards decriminalising substances including heroin, cocaine and cannabis as part of a “radical cultural shift”, the country's drugs minister has said.
Aodhán Ó Ríordáin, the chief of Ireland’s National Drugs Strategy, told a lecture at the London School of Economics on Monday that drug users will be able to inject in specially designated rooms in Dublin from next year.
The minister said attitudes to drugs needed to move away from shaming addicts to helping them and emphasised there was a difference between legalisation and decriminalisation.
It would remain a crime to profit – from either the sale or distribution of illegal drugs – but drug takers would no longer be criminalised for their addictions.
“I am firmly of the view that there needs to be a cultural shift in how we regard substance misuse if we are to break this cycle and make a serious attempt to tackle drug and alcohol addiction,” said Mr Ó Ríordáin.
However, while Mr O Ríordáin told The Irish Times that there was a “strong consensus that drugs across the board should be decriminalised,” he said it would be for Ireland’s next government to discuss.
His comments follow a leaked report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, appearing to call for a worldwide decriminalisation on 19 October.
The report was reportedly withdrawn after at least one nation put pressure on the international body to bury the findings of Dr Monica Beg, chief of the HIV/AIDs section of the UNODC in Vienna.
Discussing plans to open ‘injection rooms’ Mr Ó Ríordáin said they would be “clinically controlled environments” that would aim to prevent already vulnerable individuals from exposing themselves to further risks.
He added: “Research has shown that the use of supervised injecting centres is associated with self-reported reductions in injecting risk behaviours.”
Following the opening of the Dublin clinic, the minster added he hoped similar rooms in Cork, Glaway and Limerick would also open.

Reflection
Addiction is a disease and anything that can be done in order to treat it as such is a step in the right direction. The “injection rooms” as they call them are a good way to decrease the spread of diseases amongst addicts. The article states that “there needs to be a cultural shift in how we regard substance misuse if we are to break this cycle and make a serious attempt to tackle drug and alcohol addiction” and I believe they are moving in the right direction.

Culture Shock

Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:12:50 +0100

Recently I had the opportunity to visit Mexico and to my surprise, it was all that I had expected and more! Like any vacation, your experience is of that similar to the honeymoon stage of acculturation, whereas you (if everything goes as planned) experience excitement and euphoria. Being that I was only a tourist I did not mind the language barrier that occurred, actually I embraced it. I enjoyed trying out my few Spanish words that I knew as well as the different foods that I savored. Ultimately, I embraced the cultural differences around me. However, what if I were to stay longer, perhaps three months; culture shock would most likely set in. I would soon tire of the food and possible become irritated with the language barrier. I would become unhappy and distressed, perhaps having a feeling of homesickness. I now have a better understanding and sympathize with immigrants who are brave and courageous and overcome many obstacles in order to migrate to a foreign land.

Study: Utah has 4th Largest Gender Wage Gap in the US

Wed, 02 Dec 2015 04:58:24 +0100

SALT LAKE CITY — As an employee, student and mother, St. George resident Emily Havens, 21, is facing the same challenges as many other Utah women.

While working full time as an Internet sales associate, Havens has been attending Dixie State University full time since 2012. However, she became pregnant last year with her now 3 ½-month-old daughter, Roslyn. With Roslyn’s birth, Havens and her husband, Rodney, had to make some changes.

While her husband continued to work full time selling cars, Havens’ college plans were set back for a semester as she went from a full-time student to part-time. She also stopped working in December so she could devote more time and energy toward her college and parenthood endeavors.

“I want to be able to live this life with as little regret as possible, and I know if I focused everything on work and school and not spend time with Roslyn, I would regret that sooner or later,” Havens said. “It’s hard … to just leave your baby at home. That just comes along with being a mom.”

Reflection

This article hit close to home for me. I am also a student, mother, and wife and I would not change it for the world. However, I must admit, most days are so demanding that I do not know how to prioritize my responsibilities. Do I make dinner, clean the house, or study are constant battles I deal with on a daily basis. However, I feel that I am only growing stronger as a person. I am showing my children the importance of education and I am proving to my education the importance of life. With that being said, I cannot help but continue the constant battle of my own perspective of whether or not I am an independent or interdependent person. I would like to think of myself as an independent person, someone whose identity is thought to come from inner attributes that reflect a unique essence of myself that remains stable across many situations. However, I cannot help but relate to the interdependent person inside me as well. I also believe myself to be a part of a larger social unit, such as my family where my relationships with them is contingent with my identity. Can a person be both? I believe so. I believe a person can have self-reflecting inner attributes that are unique, but also contribute to the key relationships with those around you.

Upper Class More Likely to Behave Unethically, Study Says

Tue, 20 Oct 2015 07:20:31 +0100

SALT LAKE CITY -- Apparently, bad behavior is a lot like a college senior - upper-class.

University of California, Berkeley doctoral student Paul Piff and co-authors conducted seven studies to find out not only which socioeconomic class behaves with the most disregard for ethics, but why that behavior might have come about. What they found was "upper-class individuals behave more unethically than lower-class individuals."

Those on the highest rung of the social ladder tended to break the law more while driving, were more likely to cheat, lie during a negotiation, and in one strangely literal experiment they were even more likely to take candy from children.

Subjects in the candy experiment were asked to carry a jar of sweets intended for children to another laboratory, but were told they could have some if they wanted. Those who rated themselves as in a higher class during earlier tests "took more candy than would otherwise go to children than did those in the lower-rank condition."

This study builds on earlier research by Piff, in which he and his co-authors found that those with more money were less likely to act generously while playing a laboratory game. Only this time around, he wanted to see whether they would go so far as to break rules rather than simply fail to give.

Studies and results

Study 1: Drivers of upper-class vehicles more likely to cut off others at intersection.
Study 2: Drivers of upper class vehicles more likely to cut off pedestrians at crosswalk.
Study 3: After reading stories where a character unrightfully took something, upper-class people were more likely to suggest they would do the same.
Study 4: Upper-class individuals more likely to take candy indented for children. Showed a relationship between higher class and unethical decision tendencies.
Study 5: Showed upper-class individuals were less likely to tell the truth during a negotiation over a job position that would soon be eliminated. Showed that more favorable attitudes toward greed are what likely predispose upper-class individuals to unethical decision making.
Study 6: Favorable attitudes toward greed predicted likelihood of cheating during a game. Upper-class individuals were more likely to have those attitudes, and were more likely to cheat.
Study 7: Lower-class individuals primed with positive aspects of greed were more likely to exhibit unethical behavior, comparable to upper-class individuals.

In another experiment, researchers found that in a dice game with a $50 prize, those who were ranked among modern society's nobility were least likely to act nobly - they cheated more often than plebian counterparts by falsely inflating their scores.

Interestingly, these results were still after being controlled for race, gender and religiosity.

Why would this be the case? Other studies and statistics have shown a strong relationship between poverty and violent crime, and on the other hand plenty members of the 1 percent are big donors to charity, like Bill and Melinda Gates as well as many others. Piff's answer is, in a word, is greed.

Or rather, the answer is a person's attitude toward greed. In several experiments, subjects had their attitude toward greed rated as more or less favorable. It just so happens that those with relatively favorable attitudes toward greed were much more likely to be from the upper class.

And it doesn't end there - subjects who were "primed" to have a more favorable attitude toward greed during the experiments were more likely to steal candy or cheat, regardless of their class background.

According to the study then, the real problem is thinking that greed is not such a bad thing, relative to someone else. So why are the kings of the economic hill so likely to think with more narrow self-interest?

"If you occupy a more insular world, you're less likely to be sensitive to the needs of others," Piff told the Los Angeles Times.

That is, those with more resources to take care of themselves are less likely to depend on their relationships with others to get by. The more you have, the more independently you can operate.

Not only that, but the negative consequences of your actions may simply be easier to deal with. "The availability of resources to deal with the downstream costs of unethical behavior may increase the likelihood of such acts among the upper class." In other words, if one of the world's lowliest suddenly found themself on a pile of money, they too would be in a position to adopt a greedy attitude and behave more unethically, with fewer consequences.

The study, called "Higher social class predicts increased unethical behavior," will be published in the journal "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences."

Reflection

Upper Class More Likely to Behave Unethically, Study Says

I found this article to be quite interesting. I by no means considered that those who lived a more elaborate life style are those who are more likely to break the laws. However, upon consideration after reading the article I can now argue that it is positively true. Considering those on Wall Street and our politicians fit into this category makes more sense. Arguably, politicians may not be the most honest of individuals; they just are not caught (as often). I believe that enculturation has a profound affect in regards to the idea that the upper class are more likely to behave unethically. Over time, perhaps generations, people learn and adapt to distinct ways of what is believed to be their idea of a precise way to live. Values and beliefs within their culture is built overtime through experience and observation, molding them into what they believe is an ideal way of life.

Boyz N the Hood

Tue, 20 Oct 2015 05:51:21 +0100

Stating, “One in twenty-one African-American males will die of murder”, and that “most will be killed by another African-American” is how the film Boyz N the Hood begins. Boyz N the Hood is a disturbing account of the lived experiences of black people, particularly black males, in a poverty-stricken South Central Los Angeles neighborhood. The story follows the relationship and connections between three young Black males: Tre Styles, Darrin “Doughboy” Baker, and Ricky Baker. During the film, it is apparent how racism, indifference, rampant violence, and the increase breakdown of the South Central Los Angeles culture influence the three black males in the movie. One of the troublesome structural rudiments in the film is how black males have to battle with receiving an education or staying alive. Tre Styles learns at an early stage in his experience that the existing structure of curriculums and schools have little cultural relevancy to black students living in disadvantaged urban conditions, especially when his teachers make no effort to be inclusive in their educational teachings. Boyz N the Hood is an unfortunate story of a culturally relevant true-life example of what happens to those who are born into less fortunate cultures and the struggles faced on a day-to-day basis.