Five Nationalities Post

For the project assigned by Michelle Feldman, I had to write 5 different poems. The assignment was in response to the novel Native Son. Since the novel dealt with the issues and problems caused by racial profiling and stereotyping, I decided to write my 5 poems on the common stereotypes different nationalities are faced with. I, conveniently, happen to be descended of 5 different nationalities: English, Irish, Swedish, German and French (I know, I'm very caucasian). So, below are my poems, they're each in a different style, in keeping with the diversity between all the various cultures. Enjoy!

Five Nationality Poems

 

 

Swedish

I’m a little Swedish girl

Which means I must wear braids

My complexion: fair and milky

My hair in golden waves

Often unnoticed goes my people

All’s known of our diet is Swedish Meatballs

 

 

French

Snooty. Haughty.

These are words to describe me.

I am rude. I am demeaning.

I am French.

 

But this is a lie, a fallacy bold.

My people are noble, our roots old.

At the hub of the world I reside

My king secure in mirrored Versailles.

I am French.

 

Truth. Beauty.

Freedom. Love.

My Bohemian Revolution-

Where these ideals sprang from.

I am French.

 

 

English

The Queen! The Queen! Here comes the Queen!

Here in Great Britain, we love to hear this scream.

We are loyal, noble, proud and polite.

Tea and crumpets daily at one? Quite!

Our flag is bold, our history grand,

Our conquests are many, our accent is bland.

Here in Great Britain our teeth are not straight.

Our landmarks quite famous, Big Ben tall and great.

 

 

German

We’re the losers of World Wars one and two-

Ostracization for the mistakes of a few.

Our history is richer than this.

Chubby faces, chocolate bars.

Rosy cheeks and packed beer bars.

Aside from the negative, this is what’s known.

We are a simple people now-

Good food, friends, once again proud.

 

 

Irish

If you’re Irish you must:

Drink a lot, and be rowdy while doing so.

Have at least one kilt and eat loads of potatoes.

Know how to Riverdance- who can’t do that?

Have a lilting, trilling voice, not one that’s dull and flat.

Know how to sing bawdy songs in a pub

And if you’re having bad luck, give your four-leaf clover a rub.

Have lots of babies and be Catholic- Praise God!

Wish for pots of gold and chase after leprechauns.

Above is the cover page I created for the book of poems that will undoubtedly be put together some day when I'm very famous. :)

If you'd like to see the original assignment, view Michelle's blog, linked here.

Choosing a Side

When it comes to the highly controversial, much discussed and debated topic of the massive influx of Mexicans across our southern border, there are three basic viewpoints. You can be in favor of the immigrants- sympathetic and completely welcoming. You can be completely, passionately opposed to their presence and in favor of deportation. But, if you’re like me, you’re more on the fence than anything- still undecided. Personally, I see both benefits and disadvantages from the situation. Americans have a huge workforce ready and willing to do the dirtier, more menial jobs that aren't so willingly filled by many citizens- especially those living in our area. Also on the positive side, our country is helping people find a better quality of life than that available to them in Mexico and these people, in return, can help those they care about and 'spread the wealth'. On the downside, is this wealth being spread too thin? The sheer numbers of immigrants looking to better themselves is decreasing the pay employers are willing to offer, overpopulating and even crowding many areas, and using up much of our tax money on people who don't even contribute, themselves. So the two different ways to view the situation that I see are the more compassionate, individual, focused, humanistic view on the one hand, or the overall view of the strain being placed on our economy and society on the other. What do you think? Is there another way to look at it? Do you believe only one way to be correct?

To help you decide which side you support (or to inform you of the other side and play 'Devil's Advocate' if your mind's already made up), the list of websites below has information pertaining to all different viewpoints. Peruse them at your leisure and then draw on them in your final assignment.

-Illegal Immigration Pros and Cons

-Who Gains and Who Loses when you have IL. Immigrants?

-Legal Immigration

-The Dark Side of Illegal Immigration

-Illegals Making it Hard for Legal Immigration

-School Database: Public Opinion on Immigration

-A Hispanic Take on the Matter: Random Thoughts by Cam

-Keep Up-to-Date on the Current Events with Immigration Chronicles blog

-West Side Story's "I Want to be in America"

It is undeniable that problems are being caused in our country by the huge influx of illegal immigrants. The debate is more focused on the question of whether or not these disadvantages outweigh the benefits that are also apparent and on who is more to blame- our government, the Mexican government, the individuals who cross, or the Americans that hire them. Does the fault lie with our government for being too lenient and forgiving? With the Mexican government? The individuals seeking to better themselves? Or are the employers who hire them more to blame than anyone, as this article claims?

While reading Tortilla Curtain, by TC Boyle, your perspective on illegal (specifically Mexican) immigration may have changed. Do you think the author presents the controversial situation in a way that's more favorable towards the immigrants or towards those adversely affected by their presence in our country? 

Your assignment starts with making up your mind and choosing a side. Are you sympathetic towards the aliens and welcoming? Are you entirely opposed to their presence? If you're neither of these and still on the fence, choose the middle ground and support both sides. Now, since your mind should be made up one way or the other, or the other, your assignment is to write a paper outlining your views and providing sufficient support. Use the links provided above and cite/quote at least three in your paper (of these three, one may be the book Tortilla Curtain) and any additional sources you may find on your own. The paper should be not only an outline of your views, but also a persuasion towards the reader to side with you. Should be around 1-2 pages in length, whatever is sufficient for getting your point across.

A Gross Mislabeling

In a society of stereotypes, nowadays Mexicans and other Hispanics suffer from what is arguably the worst. Here in America they are labeled as illegal, uneducated drains on society, only here to take advantage of the generous political system and deplete our welfare and public aid reserves. This overwhelming assumption that many Americans have when encountering a dark skinned, Hispanic person is way too generalized and completely bigoted. A huge testament to some white Americans’ naivety when it comes to the actual differentiation of South Americans from Central American and Caribbean natives and so on is the broad use of the terms ‘Hispanic’ and ‘Latino’. People will use these terms and similar ones to “too tightly package the people categorized by [them]”(Gandossy) a CNN article by Taylor Gandossy points out. This article, The Complicated Measure of Being Hispanic in America, addresses the mislabeling and misunderstanding many people of ‘South of the Border’ origin are plagued by.
The author, Gandossy, doesn’t try to emphasize one opinion throughout the article. Instead, he presents multiple perspectives from people of all different levels of qualification. Those he interviewed ranged from people of all different South and Central American descent to a professor of Puerto Rican and Latino Studies at the City University of New York. These people all have different opinions on the issue of whether or not a “Latino identity” does truly exist and whether or not this shared identity is sufficient justification for a label as generalized as Hispanic or Latino. This issue must be considered before approaching the further issue of society’s use of these terms and their seeming current equivalence to ‘Mexican’.The terms ‘Latino’ and ‘Hispanic’ “are often used interchangeably, which is a point of some contention in the wider community” (Gandossy). These “governmental designations” are challenged by many of those who bear the burden of the label. They contend the perpetuation of the idea of the ‘Latino identity’. As one interviewee in the article said: "[Latinos] very often don't share language, don't share class circumstances, don't share education; it's very difficult to speak about them as one thing" (Gandossy).
People of any type of ‘South of the Border’ descent- with darker complexions, dark hair, and short stature- are often bunched into the ‘Hispanic/Latino’ category. Furthermore, those identified as Hispanic or Latino are also colloquially referred to as Mexicans. This nationality has become all encompassing as a derogatory and demeaning way to label all people of southern origin.

When considering this issue, many recent books, articles, speeches, debates, and opinions can come up. A great example of this would be TC Boyle's novel about the price of the American dream and the struggles faced by illegal immigrants weighted down by the label placed on them by a fed up society. The two aliens  in the novel give a face to these Hispanic/Latino/Mexicans (who are actually Mexican) and make it easy to see the restrictions and limitations imposed by this label. Other characters demonstrate the overuse of the label, bitterly wondering "did they all have to be Mexican?"(Boyle 149). Even a man considered tolerant and liberal, conscious of the different nationalities and origins, succumbs to this misconception.
Not only are Hispanic and Latinos in America being wrongly and rudely labeled in these two groups, but they are also now being further sequestered into the class of ‘Mexicans’, regardless of their actual origins. This derogatory mislabeling insinuates that all darker, shorter people are actually impoverished illegal immigrants and drains on our society. The Dominican-American who owns an insurance agency in Tampa, Florida is in no way the same type of person as an illegal alien who makes his living waiting on street corners for manual labor. This reprehensible assumption that people who look similar are similar and share a ‘Hispanic Identity’ should be challenged more openly and put right.

Works Cited:

Gandossy, Taylor. "The Complicated Measure of Being Hispanic in America."
CNN.com. CNN. 16 Mar. 2009 .

The Priorities of the Wealthy

By the second page of T.C. Boyle's compelling novel, The Tortilla Curtain, the reader is already becoming aware of a sad, disheartening reality: what the mindset of far too many Americans is when it comes to material possessions versus the value of a human life- but not just any human life, a Mexican life. The main character's immediate reaction to the frightening, possibly deadly, car accident he just had- hitting a man who'd jumped out into the road- is one of brutally cold materialism. Delaney admits to himself and the reader that his reactions were first "for the car (was it marred, scratched, dented?), and then for his insurance rates (what was this going to do to his good-driver discount?), and finally, belatedly, for the victim" (4). Instead of transporting the man to a hospital, Delaney drives to his Acura dealer following the accident, seeking a repair on his just recently-pristine headlight. As he calls his wife and explains what happened, his reasoning for giving the man a mere $20 and no other form of help is a shameful, yet to him undeniable, "I told you- he was Mexican" (15). This type of cold, detached justification for an act bordering on inhuman, is sadly very similar to that of many other Americans.

The Grapes of Wrath quote in the front of the book just about sums it up, before the reader even understands how pertinent it will be to the story to come: "They ain't human. A human being wouldn't live like they do. A human being couldn't stand it to be so dirty and miserable." (Steinbeck). Is this the actual mindset of most Americans? All of those people who support stricter border control and the deportation of illegal immigrants and closed borders and English as our only language and so on and so forth... is it possible that this is the way they view all of those Mexicans living in our country, striving for a better future? 

Prime-Time and Homosexuality

Anyone who ever watched prime-time television in the 90s knows of the sitcom spectacular that drew in millions. “Friends” was one of the most-watched TV shows of all time and reigned for a solid ten years. The show focuses on six young adults living and working in the Big Apple. The webs woven between the three female, three male characters- webs of sex, love, money, family, tension, conflict, and relationships- were ever-evolving and ever-engrossing to the avidly watching public of the wildly popular sitcom. Over its ten years, the show touched on every pertinent social topic there is, one of them of course being the sometimes-taboo homosexuality.
The main plot line that comes to mind at the word homosexuality is the story of Ross (one of the main six characters) and his first wife, Carol. The first season starts off with Ross slowly coming to the realization that his new wife is exhibiting some ‘gay tendencies’. Eventually, the news is broken to poor Ross that his wife has only after their marriage come to the realization that she is, in fact, gay and therefore not attracted to him but to other women. The hilarity of this story persists throughout the entire duration of the show, frequently being brought up by other characters to poke fun at Ross and often as a source of conflict between him and Carol, who became pregnant with his child before realizing that she was a lesbian.
Another related plot line is one of the chief ways that the other characters poke fun at Chandler (a chief character on the same level as Ross): his ‘quality’. At the beginning of the show’s run, before the awkward and corny Chandler dates and eventually marry Ross’s sister, Monica, people will sometimes comment on this certain vague ‘quality’ that Chandler has about him. The ‘quality’ leads many people (mostly women) to assume that he’s gay. The eight episode of the first season (The One Where Nana Dies Twice) centers around this elusive quality of his and his frustration with it. He comes to realize just how common this assumption about his sexuality is and frantically searches for an answer, an explanation as to what this ‘quality’ specifically is in a desperate attempt to suppress it. Chandler is, in fact, heterosexual, but this never-quite-identified portion of his personality leads many to assume the opposite.
In both of these plot lines- and specifically in episode eight, season one- homosexuality is not presented in a negative fashion. It isn’t something to be feared or revolted by or deemed ‘wrong’. The only way the show approaches this controversial topic is with a light heart and a joking manner. In no way is homosexuality being made fun of, only the misconceived sexuality is the big joke. While Friends could certainly have incorporated many more gay characters and plot lines into it’s ten-year run, it handled the few encounters the protagonists did actually have very well.

Gender Stereotypes

Stereotypes abound in our society, in particular those that separate men from women. As girls and boys grow older and leave childhood, they enter into a new, more mature stratum of society, independent from the innocence of youth. This stratum revolves around not only more mature but also more universal topics such as material possessions, fiscal success, relationships, and sex. Perhaps the most universal theme is the relationship between a man and a woman (second in today’s society would come same-sex relationships) and all of the conflicts that can emerge in said relationships. A common conflict in all types of relationships is often lack-of-communication. In our age of technology, people will look for solutions to their problems on the internet, queries bringing up results such as “The Five Things She Wishes You Knew” may hold the answers to their pleas.
This article, a blog post written by a man to help other men, lists “the things that women wish men understood but will rarely tell you”. These five points are listed in a clear and concise way, numbered and then explained. The first point that the author Neil Strauss makes seems completely valid (from a whimsical romantic’s perspective). He points out that “women want to be emotionally swept away, not just impressed”. You can’t get much closer to the idyllic vision many women have in their heads of a Prince Charming than a man who can sweep her off her feet. The article underlines the validity of this stereotype but doesn’t provide advice as to how the men can do this. Another piece of the author’s advice is short, sweet, and to the point. He advises: “She expects you to respect her and you better respect yourself first”. The recognition that “mutual respect is key in any successful relationship” is wonderful advice- the problem is making sure that this is incorporated in your relationship.
Neil Strauss, though insightful and correct with most of his advice, is leading his blog-followers in the wrong direction with how to respond do a woman in the mood to argue. The third point can provoke much dissent and is one that most women would be up in arms about. I, personally, am because I completely disagree with it. The author, Neil Strauss, claims that men should learn not to “argue, it’s pointless. Often [the woman] doesn’t even know why she’s feeling emotional”. This point labels all women as melodramatic and not in control of their emotions and even borders on calling women not intelligent enough to understand their own emotions. On this point, the author is incorrect and potentially misleading. His third point can effectively be taken as advice to just dismiss a woman’s anger as irrationality.
Hopefully, most of the time that a woman starts a fight it’s for a valid reason and the woman won’t merely want her man to “Sit with her, let her know she is not alone and that you will keep her safe”. This patronizing response to anger will only incite a worse renewal of arguing. The author must have learned to take the easy way out by dismissing women’s ‘illogical’ arguments as fits of scared, senseless emotion. His assumption that logic holds no weight in a woman’s mind is completely ungrounded and incorrect. But what do I know? I’m just a woman- I might just be overcome and blinded by emotion.

Works Cited:
Strauss, Neil. "The Five Things She Wishes You Knew." Weblog post. Find Your
Perfect Partner Online. 10 Feb. 2009. 25 Feb. 2009
5-things-she-wishes-you-knew-without-asking/>.

How To be a Good Little Catholic (from a Not-So-Good Little Agnostic)

This first post is in response to Jamaica Kincaid's alternative poem 'Girl'. The stream-of-consciousness look into what it sounds like to live life as a young girl in this unique household is eye opening and engrossing. The many-lined poem is interrupted only by feeble protests from the young girl against her tyrannous mother's unceasing stream of commands and is joined together by both semi-colons and a common theme: oppression. The poem below is written in the same style as 'Girl' and reflects the oppression felt by a member of the Catholic Church. As a former devout Catholic, 'converted' to Agnosticism by the inflexibility and mindlessness of the Church, I can personally relate to the overbearing suffocation that a person trying to obey the many rules and restrictions that the Church sets forth.

Rules and Restrictions of a Religion



Do not put faith in any god but the one true God; do not make for yourself a carved image; do not take the name of the Lord in vain; do not violate the holy day; do not dishonor your father or mother; but what if my father or mother is not honorable?; do not dishonor your father or mother; do not commit murder; do not commit adultery; do not steal; but what if it is to keep my family alive?; do not steal; do not doubt the one true God; do not bear false witness; do not covet your neighbor’s wife; do not covet your neighbor’s house; do not covet; do not want; but what if I need?; sometimes do not need, always do not want; do not disrespect the sanctity of the house of the one true God; do not neglect to worship in service; do not go a whole day without paying homage to the one true God; do not lie; but what if it is to spare someone’s feelings?; do not lie; but what if it is to save someone’s life?; do not lie; do not doubt the one true God; do not have unclean thoughts; do not enforce unclean thoughts; do not allow unclean thoughts; do not desire; do not lust; do not violate the sanctity of holy matrimony; do not have sexual relations until marriage; do not desire a member of your same sex; but what if I love a member of my same sex?; do not desire a member of your same sex; do not be desirous; do not take the life of an unborn child; but what if I cannot care for the child?; do not take the life of an unborn child; but what if the child will live an unhappy life?; do not take the life of an unborn child; but what if the child will be born in pain, live in pain, and die in pain?; do not take the life of an unborn child; do not doubt the one true God; do not be immodest; do not engage in unholy activities; do not question; do not doubt; do not doubt the one true God.


A reference to the "Evolution Controversy" would have been made in this poem if it weren't for this open-minded action taken by the late Pope John Paul II. For more information on religion in our country, check out this blog: Religion Clause.