Talking Point #7

Peggy Orenstein Anita Hill is a Boy

Orenstein argues that there is not enough female role models in our history to create equality in the class room when teaching both genders.

"it disturbed me that although girls were willing to see men as heroes, none of the boys would see women that way." This is not surprising to me, when you look back at our own histroy most of the predominate figures are males. They call them our "founding fathers" even when women played a role in that too. Children are brought up that way. We teach our kids how to be girls and how to be boys. If a boy picks up a barbie and want to play with it we tell him thats for girls and give him a G.I. Joe, but if a girl startes to play with a G.I. Joe or likes to play sports its okay she is just viewed as a tom boy and thats acceptable.

"it's like 'Oh, a girl,' not like 'Oh, a body.'" this is said by one of the girls in Ms. Logan's class when they are talking about sexual harrasment. She also talkes about how she feels safer at school when she where cloths that are too big so she gets the reaction quoted. Girls want to be people not just an object, yet still many men see them as just object that cook and clean for them. The expectations of a women are not as high as they are for a man in the buisness would. Men get paid more to do the same job a women does. Men are expected to make the money and women are expected to stay at home and raise the family. Two things are wrong with that. First, today it is impossible for the average family to live off one income so in most cases both parents work. Second, there is nothing wrong if a women brings home more money or is the prime provider for the family.

"its not just a female job to change it, but a male job as well." I really like how the teacher said this to the class. It really help put into there heads that not everyone of the same gender acts the same. Its not just the job of females to change how men see them men have to start to call out other men when they act in a disrespectful way towards women and women can not just walk by and take it.

Think Point #6

Charles Lawrence "One More River to Cross"

Lawrence argues that even though Brown v. Board of Education was pass by a unanimous vote in the supreme court is was still not accepted and fallowed by every American.

"Segregation's only purpose is to label or define blacks as inferior and thus exclude them from full and equal participation in society." This is one of the reasons that the Brown case holds such an important value. It tells people that separate is not equal. Blacks do not benifit from have their own all black school because they will still not receive the same education that the kids in the all white school will get. in that time teh all white school would get all teh better matierials and newer books when the black school would get the second rate things.

"Our fixation on the question of the propriety and efficacy of the remedy of busing and racial balance plans stem in large part from our tacit acceptance of the Court's rather narrow definition of the injury of segragation as resulting from the separation of black children from white chilren and th a fact ath alternative remedies have rarely been requested, much less graned." The problem can not be solved just by mixing black and white children in the same school. There as to be teaching going on about why this is being done and that the white children in that time period should not hate or abuse the black children. You can't just mix them together and hope they get along. People have to learn to be accepting and that does not happen over night. It still has not fully happed 50 plus years after the Brown case passed.

"the Supreme Court has refused to recongize that segregation will not die a natural death". this is true to this day. I remember learning about a Surpreme Court case in my Poly Sci class last year. It was about a white man pressing charged agienst a medical school for not accepting him. There was only a few spots open for people to be accepted and a black aplicant was accepted over the white man only because he was black. The white man had better test score and other things of that nature but the school took the black student to show that they had diveisty at their school. I think that wrong on the school part to almost fake it. that they want only the best students but to take someone only because of thier race over someone who is more quilfied is wrong.

Talking Point #5

Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer In the Service of What?

Kahne and Westheimer argue that in Service Learning there is a difference between charity and change. It is also true that in our world both are needed equally.

This article brought up something very interesting that i never really thought about. Charity is very different from change but charity can bring about the change you are looking for. The examples of the two teachers who do service learning project in there class really show the difference between charity and change. "a service learning curriculum can further a number of goals". By teaching students how to learn at the same time as helping other people you can have your students get both an education and experience that will shape their thinking.

"Democratic politics has become something we watch rather thean something we do." What the government does is more charity then change. The government whats to save money so they will do the minor things that temporally fix a problem rather then spend all the money at once fixing the problem for the long run.

Charity vs. Change
Charity is and the now and affects people right away. It is needed because people need help and charity is a way to help them.
Change affect people for the long run and may not carry the shame that some charity may.

Thinking Points #4

Linda Christensen argues that in all the cartoons and media we see as young children teach us a "secret education" about the place of different races, gender, and classes.

Think back to when you watch Bugs Bunny being chased by Elmer Fud. Do you remember how Bugs Bunny would look when he dressed as a woman and would kiss Elmer. He had on a red sexy dress, big red lips, and sometimes long blond hair. Is this what all women look like? Is this the only way a woman should look when trying to get a mans attention? This is just like what Christensen's students noticed "when women do appear, they look like Jessica Rabbit or a Playboy centerfold..."
Should our young kids be taught that in order for a woman to be on a cartoon they must be attractive and if they are not the attractive one they are never the main focus.
Many of the ideas in cartoons are not meant to show racism and sexism but they do and i see a negative in teaching people to alway see these underlying themes. "Now instead of seeing a bunch of ducks in cloths, they see the racism, sexism, and violence that swim under the surface of the stories". These students may not enjoy many of the cartoons they did before. So what need to change the cartoons or should the students be able to see these theme but be able to ignore them so they can sometime enjoy what they are watching?
For me this article brings me back to when i learned about all the sexual images and ideas in Disney movies. I think back to having to watch The Lion King to see if i could see the work "sex" in the clouds when Simba's father appears in the sky, or to the little mermaid to see if it was true that the priest at the wedding had a boner, and just the other day i was talking with some people and one of them said they watch Aladin that day. They realize how much of a slut Jasmin was. These things mean nothing to young kids seeing the movies for the first time but going back and seeing these things now is very shocking.

I correct myself in the lion king it is when Simba blows the flower peddle into the air.


This is just wrong for little kids to see.