Blog 10

In the article “The Children are Coming” published by The Nation, author Oscar Martinez describes how children are brutally murdered because they refuse to join gangs ranks, so they flee to the United States.

            Tens of thousands of children flee to the U.S because of gang violence.  The Obama administration tried to change the 2008 TVPRA so that within the last nine months the 52,000 child immigrants that arrived in the U.S could be deported without having to go in front of an immigration judge.  Instead of going for this proposal, the White House asked Congress for $3.7 billion dollars to hire more judges to make the removal process faster and to build up enforcement.  People worry less about the violence that children face while returning home and more on political expedience.  In 2013, The United Nations voted Honduras as the most violent country in the world with 90 murders per 100,000 people.  El Salvador came in fourth and Guatemala fifth.  Based off of El Salvador’s Institute of Legal medicine, 38% between the ages of 15 and 24 are murdered every year.  Gang violence is so widespread that they had to make a change in the law that basically stated that as long as they can prove that they were trying to protect themselves from harm, those accused of murder would be free to go.  The Lawmakers said these changes would provide the public with the tools for self defense.  Gangs are also recruiting younger and younger children dropping from 14 to 12.  Gang recruitment has attributed to the high dropout rate of many schools.  “As the case of David de la O shows, saying no to a gang can be dangerous, and hiding is nearly impossible.”  Many parents hire coyotes to bring their children into the U.S and pay them about $7,500 dollars for each child.  In the U.S, coyotes are more known as ruthless criminals on the level of narcotraffickers.  Based off of evidence, sadly reunification remains very small.  Out of the $3.7 billion, only $295 million will be used to better control the borders of El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala and create conditions to diminish the leading causes of mass migration.  No matter what the government decides to do, the mothers and fathers of these children will keep trying to find ways to be with their children again.

            Personally, I think it is wrong that children are constantly murdered by gangs just because they refuse to join.  Also, I believe that they should make changes to the 2008 TVPRA to make it easier for children to be deported.  I don’t get why gangs think it’s okay to take over and try to recruit young children into their ranks.  Gang violence is a serious problem and it should not go unseen.  Why should thousands of children be murdered each year because of gang violence.  That just doesn’t make sense to me.

Blog 9

In this article, titled “A Prisoner in the House” published by New Internationalist, author Samira Shackle talks to women from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh who are forced into arranged marriages with British citizens and are treated like prisoners by their in-laws when they marry.

Arranged Marriage

Jasminder, a woman forced into an arranged marriage by her parents who hoped it would give her a better life, was treated kind of like how Cinderella was, once she got to London.  After two long years of being a slave for her in-laws, she was expected to cook, clean, pick up her sister-in-law’s kids from school, do laundry, and iron.  She had to wash her clothes separately under the tap outside and she was only allowed to eat the scraps that her mother and sister-in-law gave her, which was very little.  She was also beaten on a regular basis and got her hair pulled.  She was only allowed to drink water when she was given permission, and couldn’t spend more than five minutes on the toilet unless she was drinking the tap water.  It wasn’t until she was taken to a clinic against her will to get an abortion where she escaped.  She told the counselor what was happening at home, so the counselor called the police.  Jasminder’s case was not a unique one.  About five hundred women every year face what she faced.  They’re brought to Britain to marry and undergo domestic violence and enslavement.  For the past twenty years, there has been significant approvement in the way Home Office who deals with immigration issues has handled it. In 1999, they passed a "domestic violence concession" that gave women the right to apply for leave to stay in the U.S.  That was only if they could prove they were victims of domestic violence.  They can apply for access to public funds while their immigration claim is processed,  Women who arent on spousal visas are completely vulnerable to exploitation, sexual slavery, and domestic violence.  The sad this is, most of these women don't know their rights.  in 2008 and 2009, 980 applications were sent in to for leave to remain.  540 faced deportation, and the rest of the 440 women could stay.  Every year, about 45,000 foreign spouses come to Britain.  Even though it's only a tiny minority that's effected by this issue, it still should be reported.

I think that women who marry into a family should never be treated this way.  What ever made people think that this was okay?  No one should ever have to go through something like this.  I can't believe it's barely reported to the police.  This kind of domestic violence and slavery should not go unseen.   I wonder why they never wanted to report about this before.  I'm sure they were scared, but why would anyone want to stay and put up with that?

Blog Post 5

In the article titled Body Art published by New Your Times, author Michael D. Lemonick talks about how body art has been around for thousands of years and describes some types of body art and their meanings.

http://ihcproxy.mnpals.net/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=2508440&site=ehost-live&scope=site

“There is no known culture in which people do not paint, pierce, tattoo, reshape, or simply adorn their bodies” says anthropologist Enid Schildkrout of the American Museum of Natural History in New York City.  We use our bodies for art because it is the nearest, most intimate canvas.  In two separate showcases, this phenomenon was celebrated.  One of them was an exhibit called Body Art: Marks of Identity, and the other was a book called African Ceremonies.  In the exhibit, they devoted over 4,000 years of body modification.  Based off of tradition, body art has been used to attract the opposite sex, boost self esteem, identify with age or gender group, and mark rights of passages, like puberty or marriage.  With Indigenous people, those personal adornments stay the same.  Teenagers use body art and piercings as a form of independence and freedom, or to fit in.  People in their 20s and 30s have latched unto to “neotribal” look that has borrowed from cultures of the South Pacific to the Amazon. It’s there way of saying that they don’t belong to the supermarket society.

I think that body art is amazing.  I love how people express themselves in so many different ways through body art.  I myself have tattoos and piercings because they are a way of expressing who I am as a person and what I love.  I don’t do it to fit in at all.  I do it because it means something to me that some people wouldn’t understand.  I plan on getting more tattoos when the time comes.

Blog Post 4

In this article, published by Cobblestone called “Destroying a Culture”, author Paulina Bigford-Duane describes how the government destroyed the Indian’s way of life and how it still impacts them

Indian Boarding Schools

For nearly 100 years, the U.S. government tried to create a policy for Native Americans that would work in the west.  More than 400 agreements were crafted between Natives from 1778-1871.  370 treaties were ratified by the U.S Senate, and another 50 treaties were negotiated that weren’t ratified.  By 1871, many Native groups were restricted to life on large reservations.  In 1887, Henry L. Dawes, Senator of Massachusetts, made a proposal to break up large reservation lands into smaller ones.  It further proposed government –funded boarding schools that the native children would go to that would teach them ways to live in “American Society”.  It forced the natives to adopt American Customs, language, and clothing.  The Dawes Act was passed on February 8, 1889 and claimed to protect native property rights.  By 1900, the 138 million acres they had dropped to 78 million.  Boarding schools were a different concern.  Because the Native children had no immunity to diseases, many of them died.  Their names were changed, they were given western style clothing, and food that was unfamiliar to them.  Since long hair was forbidden, they had to cut it off.  If the children spoke their language, they were beaten.  They also couldn’t practice native traditions or celebrations.  The Dawes Act only applied to certain groups at first, but that soon changed.  In exchange to renouncing their tribal connections, conforming to American society, and agreeing to obey U.S laws, they received property.  This policy extended into the 20^th century.  Then a report was released about Natives in the U.S called the Merian report by the Institute for Government research.  It described the inhumane conditions in boarding schools and the poor quality of life on reservations.  Soon after, the Great Depression created a severe economic downturn in the U.S.  For most of the 1930’s, it caused difficult living everywhere.  In June 1934, The Merian Report and The Great Depression resulted in the Indian Reorganization Act.  It granted the Natives the return to self government at tribal level and control of their assets.  Many tribes made their own constitutions.  “The act also created a government aid program so that native groups could receive money for land purchases and education”.  This act tried to address the worst elements of the Dawes Act and opened up the potential for discussion between the U.S government and the tribes.  It also laid the foundation for Native American rights recognition.  

Personally, I think that the Natives have always been treated unfairly.  They have been here for as long as the U.S has been here and they have never really been a problem.  It disgusts me how America thought it was okay to make the Natives change everything that they were accustomed to in their culture.  No one should ever be treated that way.

Blog Post 3

In the article “Borneo: reaping the fruits of ecotourism”, published by Unesco Courier, author Robert Basiuk describes how tourism has been a huge benefactor to their village and has made the people work together to preserve their ways of living.

Iban People of Borneo

 The Iban people depend on the forest and its resources to survive.  They use tourism to preserve the wealth of their country.  They also use the forest’s natural resources for the plants, animals, raw materials for food, and medicine.  Borneo is known to be one of the most bio-diverse rich areas.  They even created laws to protect the rainforest because it’s so important to the Iban people.  Since they changed to a cash economy, it has changed village’s needs.  Tourism has been going on there for 10-15 years.  For example, they have a remote area called Ulu Ai that’s preserved to promote a relationship between the forest and its people.  In 1986, the village was approached about making it a tourist attraction.  The project would give the community a reason to preserve the wildlife there and bring visitors to experience longhouse and up river lifestyle.  One of the biggest attractions is there big population of Orang-utans, which are a protected species and viewed as a commodity.  The village’s involvement in tourism has benefited other wildlife in other areas as well.  Because of the cash flow from tourism, stocks are stabilized.

I think their decision to include tourism was a wonderful idea.  They’re not only getting benefits from it, but other people are as well.  Not to mention the wealth that flows in from the tourism.  It has also brought the people closer together and has preserved their rainforest for their own needs .  It sounds like an awesome place to tour and I would love to travel there someday if I get the chance.

Blog Post 2

In this article, published by New York Times Upfront called “Haircuts or turbans: many young Sikhs are forgoing turbans and cutting their long hair—leaving spiritual leaders dismayed”, author Amelia Gustafson writes about how men are letting go of their turbans and cutting off their long hair in the Sikh culture.  Sikh men are choosing style over tradition and leaving their long hair and turbans behind.  Sikhism is rejecting the Hindu caste system and believing in one God.  In total, there are 23 million Sikhs worldwide, 18 million in India, and hundreds of thousands in the U.S. The Sikh religion is only at 2 percent out of all the religions in India.  Cutting their hair was forbidden for a long time, and the Sikh leaders would say “long hair is a symbol of Sikh pride”.   The turban makes them stand out and manages their long hair.  In the “turban pride” movement, about half of the Sikh men in India decline the turban whereas a few decades ago it was only at 10 percent.  In self defense, some abandoned the turban when the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi happened in 1984, which led to thousands of Sikhs getting massacred all around India.  A greater impact on this whole situation would be globalization.  People who do wear turbans are trying to reverse the ongoing trend.

I think that men should be allowed to express themselves however they want to.  I noticed a lot of other religions and cultures starting to pull away from traditions and going more towards modernization.  You still see people wearing turbans, but you also notice people  showing their hair and being more out their instead of keeping it traditional.  I find that to be interesting.

Blog Post 1

      In the article "One-Child Policy Is One Big Problem for China" from newsweek, author Susan Scutti talks about the one child policy and describes the effects it's having not just in China, but around the globe as well.  Last year, China's Nation People Congress made a change to the policy.  They allowed couples to have two children if both parents were singletons.  Still, this wouldn't fix the devastation caused by it.  In mid 1980's, they modified the rule to allow a second child if the first was a girl or disabled. The daughters are expected to obligate to their husband's family when she marries and the sons are expected to take care of their parents when they reach old age.  One of the key roles in the massive number of boys is technology and the advancements  in the medical field.  They had the ability to know what they were having.  If it was a girl, they would have abortions.  Though this is rare, people would kill girls by starvation, neglecting them when they were sick, and complete abandonment.  Changes made to the one child policy will not fix the years of pain and sacrifice made in the country.  unmarried men are called "bare branches" because they are the last in their family or end of the line.  About 48 percent undergo discrimination, shame, health effects, and stress and alcoholism.  China is now the capitol of sex and labor trafficking.  China has made changes to their social policy as well.  Restoration may never happen with sex proportions.  a huge global concern is now gender imbalance.  In conclusion, Susan Scutti describes the effects the one child policy is having on China and on the world.  She also explains the changes that have been made over the years to the policy and what the changes have done to China's society.
       Personally, I think the one child policy should be completely abandoned.  It has created so many problems that the whole world is now undergoing its effects.  I don't think that making changes to the policy will do any good because of all of the things that have already happened.  They keep on trying to modify things to make the policy more acustom to the people, but they don't realize that they are making it even worse and not helping.