Is there more to a name than just the name?

I was looking for something to blog about, when I went onto the cnn website today and found an article entitled Does you name shape your destiny?. When I began to read it I found that it talked about whether or not the name you are given has an impact on things such as your. According to the article people with "black-sounding" names such as Lakisha and Jamal are 50 percent less likely to receive a call back for a job interview compared to "white-sounding" names such as Emily or Greg." I found this interesting because it related to TV Tokenism that Mr. Bolos had talked about. Something he didn't address but I would be interested to learn about would be the names of the characters who represent the minorities. It seems to me that is there is a black man who is playing the role of police cheif, he is less likely to have a "black sounding" name than a black man playing a role of the criminal. Examples of this that I found was from "24", the president's name is Dennis Palmer, a very "white sounding" name and from Grey's Anatomy with the token asian character being names "Christina".

Not only did the article talk about how a person's name can influence their lives both negatively and positively, but it talked about the growing diversity of names. Even the most popular names now don't represent as many people as they used to. As the article points out, parents now don't want their children to fit in with society, they want them to stand out and be different. Names now need to have a special meaning like the name "Nevaeh"which is heaven spelled backwards. This made me think of our discussions on class. We watched the video about class and how lower classes had to learn how to act and be part of the upper class. Classes in America aren't just about how much money you make, they have become socially distinct. Names have a lot to do with this, you won't find many "black sounding" names in upper class family. Now, with names beceoming more diverse I believe that names won't be as influential in playing a role in class. We looked at the interactive chart that Mr. Bolos showed us that showed the popularity of names in America. But now with more diverse names I don't think that emplyers will be able make such judgements only based on a person's name because they will come across a name they have never heard before and won't have a preconcieved opion about the name.

What do you think? How much influence do you think names have?

American Studies Day

Even though American Studies Day was almost five days ago, it seems that everything I consume relates back to this day. I thought the Day was a perfect way to help cap off a wonderful year in the class that I felt I have gown the most in. After American Studies Day i discovered that my older sister often attends Slam Poetry events in her college town of St. Paul. This excited me because I enjoyed the Slam Poets that came so much and want to attend the Louder Than A Bomb festival next year. In fact Thursday night I went home and found this clip on YouTube:


I have watched this clip several time and continue to get goosebumps.

Another encounter I have had with American Studies Day has to do with Mr. B's TV Tokenism. One of my favorite shows is Friday Night Lights. The fourth season recently started and Saturday Afternoon I sat down at my computer to watch the episode I had missed. While watching it I witnessed the very thing we had talked about the day before. Although I cannot figure out embed a clip from Hulu, I can send you to this link and tell you to start watching at 23:40 and continue watching until 25:54.

The "token" black character in the scene is referred to as being some kind of  "voodoo" women. This is exactly how the medical examiner in CSI was referred to from the clip we waatched in class and both characters are black. I think this strengthens Mr. B's argument because of the similarities between the two scenes. Just as Mr. B argues, minority characters although being put in positions of authority are the roles are very 2-dimentional. Something else that I noticed in this scene was that the "token" black character was actually very fair skinned. She fulfilled the requirement of a minority in the show but has fair skin and looks "white".

Junior Theme Update #2

So for my second Junior Theme Update I am going to talk about my interview! I thought I was going to have trouble finding someone to interview, but actually I have two interviews lined up!

My first Interview is with the Senior Pastor at Winnetka Covenant Church, Peter Hawkinson, which contrary to the name is an evangelical church. I think he will be a great resource because obviously he is the head of an evangelical church but also because he is not the head of a megachurch or a fundamental evangelical church, but the kind of church that the majority of evangelicals attend.

My second interview is actually with the author of the book I used for research. The book is entitled A Lover's Quarrel With the Evangelical Church and his name is Warren Cole Smith. I'm very excited for this interview as well because as opposed to Rev. Hawkinson, Mr. Smith is not one of the people "running the show" but he was someone who was drawn to the Evangelical Church, which is exactly what I am researching: why people are attracted to the evangelical church?

Junior Theme Update

So my question for the Junior theme is to answer the question: Why has the membership of the evangelical church dramatically increased? So far I have discovered some great articles through JSTOR. One of the things I initially had trouble with was to define exactly what an evangelical church is. After figuring out exactly what that was my research be came a lot easier. According to one of my articles evangelical means a group of people who:

1. have been or are seeking a "born-again" experience and have a personal relationship with Christ
2. take the Bible literally
3. are committed to spreading "the Good News" and "bearing public witness to their faith"

Also, within the evangelical faith there are four "subcultures"
-Fundamentalists
-Pentecostals
-Charismatics (typically associated with megachurches)
- neo-evangelicals

Along with the great articles from JSTOR and CQ researches I am in the middle of my book, A Lover's Quarrel with the Evangelical Church, which is a great resource because it is from the point of view of a member of the evangelical church.

I love the New Millennium?

Throughout our American Studies Class, Mr. Bolos and Mr. O'Connor have reinforced the idea that everything is a construction. During class on Friday we watched a video on the 1920's and we briefly discussed what and why things were chosen to be put in the video that was supposed to represent the entire decade. This made me think of these television specials on VH1 that are called I Love the (insert decade). There are ten segments of the decade, each focusing on a different year. So, the special I Love the 80s, would have ten segments starting with I Love 1980 and ending with I Love 1989. I know it may seem like a far stretch to go from an educational video straight to VH1, but they are similar.

The TV special's format is nothing like our 1920's video, yet they both had to make choices on what to include in order to give the viewer "the whole picture" of that decade. Which celebrities to highlight, which scandals to poke fun at, and which fashion trend to be embarrassed by. Although the "experts" on VH1 are all comedians and popular figures from that time period and the 1920's video was the host (I forgot his name) taking us through his family tree they both constructed the show that was produced.

During our classes many times people have brought up what the think will be included in an educational video about the first decade in the new Millennium and it just so happens that VH1 has produced seven segments starting with I Love the New Millennium: 2000 and ending with I Love the New Millennium: 2007. I thought it would be interesting to show you what some of the highlights that VH1 has chosen to represent this decade are. (Warning: this list is also a construction.)

• Presidential Elections
• Music: Who Let the Dogs Out?, Lady Marmalade, Laffy Taffy, Here It Goes Again, You're Beautiful, London Bridge, Hey There Delilah
• TV shows: Survivor, The Daily Show, Fear Factor, The Weakest Link, American Idol, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, Punk'd
• Movies: Pearl Harbor, Moulin Rouge, Zoolander, Lord of the Rings, The Passion of the Chirst, Napoleon Dynamite, Brokeback Mountain, Borat
• 9/11
• Fashion: Tramp Stamp, Muffin Top, Ugg Boots, Crocs
• Technology: iPod, Segway, YouTube, MySpace, Facebook, Google, iPhone
• Katrina

Eye Contact and a Handshake

As we discussed the final chapters of The Great Gatsby we talked about what a hand shake can tell you about a person and how long you should hold eye contact with another person. I became very interested in the topic of eye contact. Mr. O'Connor seemed to think that holding eye contact for a long period of time was some sort of animal instinct and a challenge to the other person. I wanted to see if other people agreed with this. While searching the web for an article I saw something that didn't immediately occur to me, each country has a different social interpretation of eye contact.

In Islamic countries, members of the opposite sex should never hold eye contact for more than a couple seconds. Doing this can be considered cheating or even a form of adultery. In other countries it is rude to look at the superior person of the situation in the eyes. As far as animal instincts goes, I agree that there is some part of our DNA that says holding eye contact is a threat. I believe in class we agreed that dogs and bears were animals that saw holding eye contact as a threat and a challenge.

But why is it different in America? In our country we are told when you first meet someone you want to impress you need a firm handshake and to look them in the eye. Or why is it that when I type in "first impression" to Google images one of the first pictures I get is this:

A guy looking straight at the camera and reaching out for a hand shake.

This is a question I actually don't really know what I think about. The only tentative answer I have is that maybe in America we feel that in order to succeed we need to be aggressive, and by being aggressive we tap into those animal instincts and hold eye contact.
What do you think?

Full Body Scan: Strip Search?

TSA has recently begun to install full body scanners at security check points throughout the our nation's airports. As of now three have been installed  at Boston's Logan Airport. TSA plans to distribute as many as 150 to the nation's busiest airports. The full body scanners are set up are made for people to stand between two large sensors and a picture of the person being searched will be displayed on the screen of the security officer's computer. The screening gives the security at airports a more accurate idea of if someone is carrying potentially harmful items into the airport. But many question whether these scans violate a person's privacy.

As I said the scanners show a detailed image of a person's body, in an article from the LA Times the scanners were compared to a "virtual strip search". Images such as this appear on the screens of security.
The images are certainly graphic, but should people have to sacrifice their privacy in the name of security. The body scans are effective and you can see in the picture where this man's gun is located. patting down a person may not have been as effective in this situation. In a pat down a woman could potentially hide a weapon in her chest and no security officer is going to pat her down there, but here trade off is another member of security essentially seeing a picture of her naked.
Would you feel comfortable stepping into a full body scanner at O'Hare? Do you feel personal privacy should be sacrificed  to ensure national safety? If so, where should the line be drawn?