1. Couple raise child as 'gender neutral' to avoid stereotyping Richard Alleyne, The Telegraph, Jan 2012
2. Raising a Genderless Child: Possible? Emily Sohn, Discovery News, May 2011
3. Gender Bias? Raise A Genderless Child Victoria Pynchon, Forbes, May 2011
4. Family Formation and Raising Children Among Same-sex Couples Gary Gates, Williams Institute, Jan 2012
5. Baby Storm Raised Genderless Is Bad Experiment, Say Experts Susan James, abc news, May 20116. Gender Liberation: The Harmful Effects of Raising Children Gender Neutral Brittany Villalva, Christian Post, Feb 2012
7. William Wants a Doll. Can he have one? Feminists, Child Care Advisors, and Gender-Neutral Child Rearing Karin Martin, JSTOR: Gender and Society, Aug 2005
8. Children's Search for Gender Cues: Cognitive Perspectives on Gender Developement Carol Martin and Diane Ruble, JSTOR: Current Directions in Psychological Science, Apr. 2004
9. Gender As A Social Structure: Theory Wrestling With Activism Barbara Risman, JSTOR: Gender And Society, Aug. 2004
10. Toward a Dialectical Model of Family Gender Discourse: Body, Identity, and Sexuality Libby Blume, JSTOR: Journal of Marriage and Family, Nov. 2003
11. "No Way My Boys Are Going to Be Like That!": Parents' Responses to Children's Gender Nonconformity Emily Kane, JSTOR: Gender And Society, Apr. 2006
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Saturday, February 11, 2012
Monday Matters- Marking Period 4 Week 3
The Zuckerberg Tax- by David S. Miller
Miller brings up an important point about a flaw in the US tax system, that is highly relevant in a time in which unequal distribution of wealth has been focused on in everything from President Obama's speeches to the Occupy movement. Facebook's upcoming IPO, and Mark Zuckerberg's expected liquidation of 5 billion dollars worth of stock, highlights an often forgotten point. With the U.S's current tax system, that 5 billion sold will be taxed, but the rest of Zuckerberg's holdings won't, and in this way the super wealthy can effectively avoid all taxes by keeping their shares, and simply borrowing money against them. Furthermore, the U.S tax system allowed it so that when Steve Jobs died and his 2 billion in Apple stocks were inherited by his wife, the only taxes she would need to pay upon selling would be on appreciation since his death. Miller proposes a "Zuckerberg" "mark-to-market", in which annually the shares of the super wealthy would be taxed(top tenth of the top 1 %), whether they were sold or not. This would be an effective way level the playing field between the extraordinarily wealthy, and everyone else, not affecting even most regularly wealthy people.
I think that this topic, and idea is really interesting, and its great to actually see a viable solution to this problem in America, rather than just more complaints. I think it would be interesting to research the U.S tax system more overall, as it has become really focused on this past year in legislation and the news.
Miller brings up an important point about a flaw in the US tax system, that is highly relevant in a time in which unequal distribution of wealth has been focused on in everything from President Obama's speeches to the Occupy movement. Facebook's upcoming IPO, and Mark Zuckerberg's expected liquidation of 5 billion dollars worth of stock, highlights an often forgotten point. With the U.S's current tax system, that 5 billion sold will be taxed, but the rest of Zuckerberg's holdings won't, and in this way the super wealthy can effectively avoid all taxes by keeping their shares, and simply borrowing money against them. Furthermore, the U.S tax system allowed it so that when Steve Jobs died and his 2 billion in Apple stocks were inherited by his wife, the only taxes she would need to pay upon selling would be on appreciation since his death. Miller proposes a "Zuckerberg" "mark-to-market", in which annually the shares of the super wealthy would be taxed(top tenth of the top 1 %), whether they were sold or not. This would be an effective way level the playing field between the extraordinarily wealthy, and everyone else, not affecting even most regularly wealthy people.
I think that this topic, and idea is really interesting, and its great to actually see a viable solution to this problem in America, rather than just more complaints. I think it would be interesting to research the U.S tax system more overall, as it has become really focused on this past year in legislation and the news.
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Monday Matters- Marking Period 4 Week 2
For your own sake, stop working so hard
Americans work more hours and take less days off than people around the world. Furthermore, the productivity of the American worker has increased fourfold since the 1950s even as buying power of wages has not. During this time of economic troubles, it may seem counter-intuitive to advocate working less. But these economic troubles are not due to low productivity or corporate profitability, but rather corporate greed. The American corporate culture focused on profits is unsustainable and destructive to the long-term health of the economy (not to mention the health of the workers). Shorter workweeks would spread out the workload and give jobs to the unemployed, give Americans more leisure and family time, and even help to lower America's energy consumption.
I think that the idea of people being *too* hardworking is certainly revelation to my life, as well as the lives of most people I know. I am especially interested in the cultural differences regarding work between America and other countries, and I think it would be interesting to research more on that aspect. For example, I know that in Europe taking afternoon siestas is common, and I think it would be interesting to research to benefits of siestas on overall health and well being.
Americans work more hours and take less days off than people around the world. Furthermore, the productivity of the American worker has increased fourfold since the 1950s even as buying power of wages has not. During this time of economic troubles, it may seem counter-intuitive to advocate working less. But these economic troubles are not due to low productivity or corporate profitability, but rather corporate greed. The American corporate culture focused on profits is unsustainable and destructive to the long-term health of the economy (not to mention the health of the workers). Shorter workweeks would spread out the workload and give jobs to the unemployed, give Americans more leisure and family time, and even help to lower America's energy consumption.
I think that the idea of people being *too* hardworking is certainly revelation to my life, as well as the lives of most people I know. I am especially interested in the cultural differences regarding work between America and other countries, and I think it would be interesting to research more on that aspect. For example, I know that in Europe taking afternoon siestas is common, and I think it would be interesting to research to benefits of siestas on overall health and well being.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Monday Matters- Marking Period 4 Week 1
The Other Final Frontier
By BEN HELLWARTH
While missions to outer-space and the moon bear technological and scientific fruits, they without a doubt expensive: coming billion dollar price tags. Today's economic downturn and high government debt does not mean that we should stop pursuing scientific expansion entirely, however, but that the United States should look for better value projects than space exploration. And an area with a lot of potential for that is exploration in the other direction: in the deep ocean. American underseas programs have been limited and then dwindling as the Navy shelved most of what programs there were due to some dangers as well as not high enough suitability for military endeavors. There is much opportunity in the ocean's depths, however, for advancements in medicine, biology, and environmental understanding that is ample reason to expand exploration into "The Other Frontier".
This article shed a lot of light for me on the possibilities for science on own home planet, and I think that today innovative research is more important than ever. It would be interesting to research more on possibilities for research like this one, as well as addressing questions of government and military involvement in science.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Monday Matters -Nicholas D. Kristof Synthesis
Kristof overall, has liberal views in politics, but is not afraid to criticize whichever side, and as a humanitarian cares strongly about international politics as much as domestic politics. He moves beyond international competitiveness and even commends China above America, as in his article A New Kim, A New Chance? saying "American officials blame China for coddling North Korea, but at least Beijing has a strategy", but his reason for commending China(in helping dissolve North Korea) shows that he believes in democracy and human rights above all. In President as Piñata, and Waiting for Mitt the Moderate, Kristof shows that although he is clearly a liberal Democrat, he is not afraid to cross party lines for the good of America, admitting in the latter "but the Democratic claims of constant inconstancy seem exaggerated". He argues that "If we turn Obama out of office a year from now, let’s make sure it is because the Republican nominee is preferable, not just out of grumpiness toward the incumbent during a difficult time", showing that he does not agree with excessive critcism of Obama, nor does he dismiss the possibility of choosing a Republican entirely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)