Domestic Division of Labor

I do believe there is certainly a problem with women having a "second shift" in this world.  I see it all the time.  I grew up with it.  When my father came home from work, he's sit down and watch tv.  My mother would have dinner just about done, and then we'd all sit down to eat.  After dinner, dad would go watch tv and mother was left to clean up. 

On the other hand, I'm a very very lucky woman.  I knew this prior to filling out the task chart for this section, but I can honestly say that the division of labor, despite the fact that my husband works full time and I'm a stay-at-home-mom, is pretty equal.  Of the listed tasks, many of them (14), my  husband and I work together on: sometimes working side by side, other times taking turns.  There were fifteen tasks listed that I do solely, or almost solely.  And there were five tasks that my husband does solely, or almost solely.  Grant it, when my husband is deployed or on TDY, I do everything on the list either by myself or with the help of my children.  But I filled out the chart as if my husband was home.

I certainly think this is why we've been married longer than most of our friends and why I can say that after fourteen years of marriage I am looking forward to the next fourteen.  A fair division of labor between wife and husband means less resentment and more time for both spouses to have "down" time or "veg" time. 

Religion Pt 2: Religion's Role in Government

The role of religion in government is a very touchy subject.  Our forefathers wanted a separation of church and state for the reason that when Britian was controlling them, they had no say in how they could worship.  Today though, separation of church and state means something completely different, and too many people are trying to take it too far, and for what?  I see a breakdown of morals in our society.

Our country was based off religious freedom, among other freedoms of course.  But it doesn't mean that religion, or more appropriately a moral foundation based off religion, shouldn't be a cornerstone of our society.

I'm not saying we need to go back to when the Church ruled over every aspect.  The contrary, because history has shown that with that much power, even the Church grew corrupt.  We certainly need the balance of power that our government has put in place.  But Religion offers a moral compass for society, of which there is compelling argument that we as a society have started to loose.

Religion Pt 1: Secularization

Several people in the past, such as Karl Marx, have predicted that as modernization spread that religious secularization would occur.  I certainly think there is enough evidence to say beyond a doubt that secularization is occuring in society. 

Look at the push for taking anything religous out of our country's symbols: the dollar bill, the pledge of allegiance, etc.  Religion just does not have as much power in the majority of the societies in this world, but especially in the developed countries where technology and science has grown.

Race

In a Tale of Two Families, the reader is exposed to the differences between growing up black and growig up white in the United States.  Unfortunately, I'm not surprised by the results.  It's unfortunate, but ethnic conflict and stratification is ingrained in us.  We saw from the results of the self-tests earlier in the week that as a society we tend to unconciously favor white to black.  I think we just need to all try to make a more concious effort to be fair and tolerant of everyone, no matter where they come from.

Socializing Gender

Gender is certainly something that is taught (nurture).  But I think as much as parents would like to influence their boys to do boy activities and girls to do girl activities, or even keeping activities as gender neutral as possible, the outside world gets in the way.  Take my idea to keep my kids away from guns (play) and violence.  I soon had to let that one go because, perhaps because we are part of the military community, no matter where my kids went, other boys were playing with toy guns.  TV and school, alike, either reinterate or undo what parents teach their children.

Global Inequality: Why Care?

Critics and proponents of globalization are waging a fierce debate over the effects of globalization on inequality.  Are the world's rich and world's poor growing closer together or farther apart?  Why should we care either way?

Proponents claim that globalization has brought the world together on a level playing field, while critics contend that globalization has created an unequal world.  I think these statements are too general to be accurate.

It is very clear, however, that current global inequality levels, whether they have been moving up or down, stand very high.  Inequality of income is as severe in global society as it is in any particular country in the world.  If we envision the whole world as one society, which is precisely what globalization encourages us to do, we would see that economic inequality among the world population is greater than it is within these countries marked by economic disparity and social fractures.

The statistical debates about trends and causes of global inequality remain crucially important.  We need to understand the changes in national and international economic systems that together comprise the process of globalization and their relationship to the widening or narrowing of global inequalities.  The examinations of social scientists working on these issues must carefully break down the processes in order to isolate the various relevant factors, such as technological changes, population changes, climate changes, knowledge/educational changes, changes in tariffs and other barriers to trade, and movement in exchange rates.

The basic claim that humans are social beings brings us to theheart of how and why inequalities matter, morally especially.  Dollars are an abstraction, albeit a fundamental one for survivial in today's economy.  It is the impact of those dollars on one's everyday activities and perceptions of self and the world that really matter.  We are more concerned with the intrinsic components of well-being than with dollars or automobiles.  Are persons able to meet their basic and more complex human needs?  Are they able to participate in their own society?  Do they have the freedoms and capacities to express themselves culturally, politically, and religiously?  These are questions of fundamental human well-being.