Author: Andre Coleman

“What everyone wants from life is continuous and genuine happiness” (Baruch Spinoza). Happiness basic meaning is an emotion that creates feelings of contentment, love, complete joy, and life satisfaction. However, how happiness is attained and interpreted can vary across cultures throughout the world. Researchers have asked the question of what makes one culture happier than another, and why. According to Suh and Oishi(2002), “all humans strive to be happy is true, intriguing findings emerged when researchers scrutinized happiness in more detail across cultures: 1) individualist cultures are happier than collectivist, 2) psychological attributes characterizing the self such as, self-esteem, and self-consistency are more relevant to happiness of individualist than to the happiness of collectivist, and 3) the self-judgment of happiness is anchored on different types of cues and experience across cultures.” Adrian White a researcher at the University of Leicester researched over a 100 studies within the psychology of happiness and created the first Map of Happiness using over 80,000 people worldwide, across 178 countries. He ranked the countries based on relational data to a nations, health, wealth, and education ( ).

Subjective well-being (SWB) is a commonly used term within the field of psychology, which can be defined as how someone identifies his or her current life satisfaction or happiness. There are three components to SWB: 1) life satisfaction, 2) positive emotional experiences, and 3) absence of negative emotions (Suh & Oishi, 2002). Therefore, people that are satisfied with their lives regularly feel positive emotions, and rarely experience negative feelings are considered to possess a high level of SWB. Most importantly, one’s personal subjective perception over their own personal well-being can only be judged by them and is of great importance.

There are many cultural trends within SWB such as, happier nations tend to be happier, gross national product (GNP) as well as, a linkage between SWB and income level across nations attributes to higher levels of happiness. On the contrary, the idea that richer countries are happier is not true. A country may be economically stable but they may also value human rights and provide a democratic government that contributes to their SWB. Therefore, it is not certain whether possessing a national wealth causes SWB because of their monetary value or simply because of non-materialist qualities. Furthermore, there are groups of nations that challenge the linkage between SWB and income. Suh and Oishi (2002) reported that “SWB reports of some wealthy East Asian nations are among the lowest in the world (e.g., Japan), in comparison to some Latin American nations (e.g., Puerto Rico) reporting having a higher level of SWB in contrast to their reported income level. In addition, “Once a nation becomes rich enough to fulfill most people’s basic needs (food, shelter), further economic prosperity does not guarantee further increase of SWB.”

Individualism, Collectivism, and Subjective Well-Being

Individualism and collectivism are dimensions of national cultures and they are strongly linked to SWB. Individualistic societies (e.g., America) values individual rights, and feelings are more important over the expectations of the in-group, thus, everyone is expected to look after themselves and/or their immediate families; whereas, collectivist societies (e.g., East Asia) value the needs of the in-group over the needs of the individual. Personal freedom may have positive and negative consequences. Within individualistic or collectivist societies, people have personal freedom to choose their own lifestyle with the risk of not having a strong social support which may lead to serious consequences such as, suicide. On the other hand, collectivist societies do posses strong social support as long as one does not seek to fulfill personally rewarding goals that do not reflect the in-group goals.

According to Diener, Diener, and Diener (1995), “although there seems to be a tradeoff associated with personal freedom, in study after study researchers have found that individualist culture members are happier than collectivist cultural members. One explanation is that because wealthier individualist societies have a lower level of poor living conditions to their counter poor collectivist societies may account for this differentiation. Additionally, “when a nation’s degree of individualism is statistically controlled, income no longer predicts subjective well-being.”

A major contributor to a high level of SWB is, having a high sense of personal choice and freedom. In order to achieve personal goals, individualist are willing to risk attaining their goals over having strong network of support since personal goals affect people on a daily basis whereas, life crisis only happen occasionally. Additionally, individualistic societies strive for a high level of SWB than collectivist societies. Within individualistic societies, there is accountability for each individual to attain happiness in their lives because the inability to attain happiness is perceived as though they have not been successful. Whereas in collectivist societies, there is not much personal choice and freedom to seek happiness because their level of luck or their ancestry is what determines ones happiness.

People in individualistic cultures may believe that they are happier than collectivist cultures because they have personal freedom to choose how to evaluate their level of happiness on their areas of strength such as, their careers or their marriages. For example, if Bobby is an excellent lawyer, whereas, Tom has a successful 30-year marriage. Consequently, if the most valued personal quality were career and marriage success, then they would both would feel quite happy. These individual beliefs are respected within individualistic cultures. However, in collectivist cultures what is valued is based on the in-group and not by the individual. For instance, achievements such as, education may be their area of strength and evaluating factor for happiness. For that reason, if they are unable to meet these goals it is viewed as failure to the in-group and they are unable to justify happiness.

Individualism vs. Collectivism

Psychologist, Dr. Geert Hofstede worked and analyzed fifty countries from around the world and came up with four primary dimensions to describe a country’s culture, which include Power Distance, Individualism, Masculinity, and Uncertainty Avoidance ( ). Individualism describes the countries orientation towards the group or the individual. The orientation that looks to the group is referred to as Collectivism, and the orientation that looks to the individual is Individualism. According to Hofstede, Individualism and Collectivism assess the function of the individual and the group within society. Hofstede reported that there is a correlation between individualism and wealth. Within the ten individualist countries, Denmark ranks 74. Hofstede concluded that individualistic cultures place achievement on family and profession.

Denmark has a very high individualism culture with a score of 74, with only seven other countries having a higher individualistic culture. The Danes are very proud of their work and do not accept help from others because they believe they do it best. They strive to be on top of their business getting the most credit or the greatest individual merits. Danes also like to have a very private life away from their business lives. When meeting they will only talk about business plans and work at the working environment and then when at a family meal they will discourage business talk. Denmark is also a competitive country when it comes to education. Even the education, Denmark’s individualism is very important there is a constant struggle to be on top of your class, and have the best grades and merit status. Although Denmark is a very high individualistic country, they have some collectivist characteristics. Danes are proud people, however, most are modest and reserved about their accomplishments and refrain from bragging. They believe there is one way to act and if you are not acting according to the codes, someone will speak up to correct or discipline you. Danes do not like to stand out, nor do they yell or scream so they do not call attention to themselves when in public. In addition, when doing business each person will give their input on the decision and then after getting everyoneaa‚¬a„?s input they will make a decision.

t Geert Hofstede Cultural Dimensions Cultural Dimension(Graph). 2003. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from: http://www.geert-hofstede.com/hofstede_denmark.shtml

The United States high rankings of Individualism signify a more self-reliant, self-centered population that is concerned with themselves and their families. Individualistic population’s posses a more “I” than “we” mentality; for instance, when climbing the corporate ladder they do not take into account how this would affect others. Americans are constantly in pursuit of reaching for a better job or position. When Americans reach success, they are quick to emphasize their success and achievements. Since America is such a competitive nation, the people are expected to defend their interests and try to promote themselves whenever possible. Unlike the Danes, Americans rarely are modest, they want to be heard, stand out in a crowd, and is ready to boast whenever possible.

World Map of Happiness

Adrian White a social psychologist from the University of Leicester created the first “World Map of Happiness”. White analyzed information from more than 100 studies within the field of happiness research. Some of the collected data that White analyzed in order to create a global projection of SWB was published by United Nations Educational , Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the New Economics Foundation, the World Health Organization (WHO), the Veenhoven Database, the Latinbarometer, the Afrobarometer, and the United Nations Human Development Report (UNHDR). In order for White to map out SWB across 178 countries, his research incorporated using a battery of statistical data along with responses of 80,000 people worldwide.

Adrian White analyzed the data in relation to a nation’s health, wealth, and access to education. According to White, the main factors related to determining a nation’s happiness are health, the level of poverty, access to food and water, access to basic education, and population size. The top ten countries included Denmark and five other European countries, including Switzerland, Austria, and Iceland, while bottoming the list were Zimbabwe and Burundi (Kamenev, 2006). Some of the better scoring nations were smaller encompassing greater social cohesion with a stronger sense of national identity, whereas, the nations with the largest populations scored the worst. For instance, China ranked 82, India 125, and Russia 168. The United States ranked 23.

Rank

Country

Rank

Country

Rank

Country

1

Denmark

11

Ireland

23

United States

2

Switzerland

12

Luxembourg

35

Germany

3

Austria

13

Costa Rica

41

United Kingdom

4

Iceland

14

Malta

62

France

5

The Bahamas

15

The Netherlands

82

China

6

Finland

16

Antigua and Barbuda

90

Japan

7

Sweden

17

Malaysia

125

India

8

Bhutan

18

New Zealand

167

Russia

9

Brunei

19

Norway

177

Zimbabwe

10

Canada

20

Seychelles

178

Burundi

Jubak, J Jubak, J.. (2009). GDP vs. GNH (Gross National Happiness). MSN Money. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Investing/JubaksJournal/gdp-vs-gnh-gross-national-happiness.aspx?page=2

Not surprisingly, being wealthy and healthy can influence a person’s level of happiness. Wealthier countries ranked higher on the index such as, Switzerland ranked two, and Luxemburg 10 in comparison to impoverished and unhealthy countries like most African countries. For instance, Zimbabwe ranking 177 has an AIDS rate of 25%, average life expectancy of 39, and an 80% poverty rate. Fellow Africans in Burundi ranked the worst 178, despite have a slightly lower poverty rate of 68%, their low ranking was partly due to their constant conflicts between the Hutus and the Tutsis (Kamenev, 2006).

In the past, researchers have linked collectivism with a high level of SWB. However, some highly collectivist Asian nations scored worse such as, China ranked 82, Japan 90, and India 125. Furthermore, Capitalist countries typically associated with being heartless were not a source of unhappiness. With the top scoring countries being strong capitalist, including the U.S. ranking 23, allegedly possessing free-market systems attributes to unhappiness because it may create a sense of insecurity and competition is not true.

A Global Projection of Subjective Well-being (map). 2006. Retrieved March 15, 2010 from: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/Science-Fiction-News.asp?NewsNum=893

Danish

Denmark easily tops the World Happiness Map with their negative poverty level, endless public and social services, and high standard of living. Education is of great importance to them, in turn they possess a high level of education including, top-notch public schools, and affordable private schools. Their strong sense of national identity is mainly due to their low population levels. Furthermore, their panorama of natural beauty could not hurt them either, however, the weather is cold and windy.

Most Danes value equality, coziness, individuality and democracy. Danes’ tone is informal in comparison with many other countries. Friends, family members and colleagues are addressed with the informal “you” and their first name. It is also normal to address managers by their first name. Additionally, the informal tone is found in the educational system, where students address their teachers by first name.

Discussion and debate are fundamental aspects of Dane’s upbringing, both in society and in families. This means that many Danes have a fundamental awareness that it is possible to speak up and have an influence. Danes business world and associations are social, informative with a structure that characterizes Denmark.

In Denmark, importance is placed on everyone being equal and having equal rights without regard to social background and origin. Thus, one could be led to believe that Danes are anti-individualists; however, this is far from the truth. As in most other European countries, Danes have a fundamental belief in the rights of the individual and career, housing, etc., which is selected, based on their individual needs. Entrepreneurship and initiative are prized and self-confidence is generally high among Danes. This ability to combine individualism with a focus on the welfare of the group is what one could call social individualism.

Denmark has a comprehensive public health service, including doctors, medical specialist, hospitals, health service, home care, health visitor services, and pediatric dental care and more. The Danish health service is based on the principle of equal access to the health services for all citizens. The municipalities are responsible for preventative health care programs for children, home nursing, health visitor services, pediatric dental care and in-school health services. The municipalities issue health cards and administer citizens’ choice of doctor and health insurance group. The five regions are responsible for operating the hospitals and psychiatric treatment in the regions.

Americans

America is the land of free and strives to “be all that you can be.” Nearly every American could agree that American values are based upon individual freedom, which may be considered individualism or independence. The United States solidified and guaranteed these values with the creation of the United States Constitution. It encompasses the belief that it is everyone’s individual responsibility to choose his or her own destiny by treating everyone as equal and not judged by race, gender, religion, age, disability, or sexual preference.

The key to success and financial freedom is often attributed to education. Education is not limited to the classroom for Americans; it is extend by educational programs such as, extracurricular activities, and internships. Additionally, continued education through adult education programs are just as equally valued.

The American family unit is consists of love, respect for all members and bringing happiness to each individual member. Individuality is emphasized by allowing children to disagree or even argue with their parents, which is regarded as a part of developing independence. American family values can easily be misunderstood by other cultures or perceived as a sign of disrespect.

The American Dream is attained by hard work, persistence, and resiliency. Success is measured by individual success, power, status, and wealth. In America, the government protects the rights of the individual and the individual does not need to protect those of the government. Progression is the key to success and change is constant in America. If one cannot keep up with what is happening they will be left behind because was important yesterday is not necessarily important today.

The hunt for happiness in America can be quite difficult because it can be compared to an individual sport. Americans are quite competitive including the search for happiness. It is believed that happiness is directly attributed to a person’s family and friends. Interestingly enough, possibly everything that defines an American could possibly be what is preventing us from being happy.

Conclusion

One’s happiness is influenced just as much by culture as it does by our goals and personalities. Most people in society desire some form of well-being psychologically as well as physically. Depending on what culture a person is a part of may be the defining factor for whether a person his happy or not. Many researchers from the field of happiness psychology have studied whether happiness could be regarded as universal. We now know that it is not. The pursuit of happiness varies greatly depending on one’s culture and circumstances. What is certain is that happiness is linked to health, wealth, and education. Furthermore, whether or not one is a part of an individualist or collectivist nation, is it the individual that has priority or is it the in-group that makes someone happy?

Anthropology is crucial for understanding the contemporary world. Anthropology offers both things to think about and things to think with. Anthropologists would be interested in Totemism because they study people throughout the world, investigating their history, behaviour, how they adapt to different environments, communicate and socialise with each other, along with examining the biological characteristics that make us human, our physiology, genetic make-up, nutritional history and evolution along with social features like language, culture, politics, family and religion.

Totemism is a belief system where humans are believed to have kinship or a mystical relationship with a spirit-being such as an animal or plant. The totem is thought to interact with a given kin group or individual and serve as their emblem or symbol. Totemism has been described as ‘a cluster of traits in religious and in the social organisation of populates’ (Encyclopaedia Britannica Online, 2013). Totemism originates in populations whose traditional economies relied on hunting, gathering and mixed farming with the emphasis on rearing cattle. Totemism is a multifaceted set of ideas and ways of behaviour built on a worldview drawn from nature. There are ideological, mystical, emotional, reverential, genealogical relationships of social groups or specific persons with animal or natural objects, the totem. There is a difference between group and individual Totemism although they share a few basic characteristics; they happen with different emphasis and in specific forms. Generally societies have special names and emblems to relate to the totem, and those it sponsors engage in partial identification with the totem or symbolic integration to it. Usually, there is a taboo against people killing, eating, or touching the totem.

Individual Totemism is articulated in an intimate relationship of friendship, respect and protection between a person and a particular species of animal; the natural object can grant special power to its owner. However, this relationship, in the case of the individual totem, begins and ends with the individual man, and is not, like the clan totem, transmitted by inheritance. An individual totem in America is:

“Usually the first animal of which a youth dreams during the long and generally solitary fasts which American Indians observe at puberty. He kills the animal or bird of which he dreams, and henceforward wears its skin or feathers, or sonic part of them, as an amulet, especially on the war-path and in hunting” (Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2013)

Individual totems among the Slave, Hare and Dogrib Indians will always be a carnivorous animal, and must not be skinned, eaten or killed. A man will always carry a photograph of his totem; if they are unsuccessful in a chase he will smoke to it and make a speech.

Group Totemism is the most widespread belief system. The totem is often an animal or plant that is respected by all members of the social group, because of a mystical or ritual relationship between the group, the spirit which embodies the totem represents the bond of unity within the tribe or clan. The group believe they are descended from a totem ancestor or that they and the totem are brothers. The totem can be viewed a group symbol and the protector of all members of the group. The animal or plant totem is the object of a taboo, just as the individual totem it is forbidden to kill or eat the sacred animal. It is possible for the totem symbol to be tattooed on the body, engraved on weapons or carved on totem poles. Males and females in some cultures have their own totem; however, typically Totemism is connected with clans or blood relatives. Marriage between members of the same totemic clan is totally forbidden. Group Totemism is usually associated with people in Africa, India, Oceania, North America and some parts of South America.

The first theory on Totemism was conducted by McLennan (1869) who searched for the origins of totemism, he belied that:

“The ancient nations came, in prehistoric times, through the totem stage, having animals and plants, and the heavenly bodies conceived as animals, for gods before the anthropomorphic gods appeared” (Levi-Strauss, 1969, p. 18)

Many scholars believed this theory and set out with the assumption that ‘some type of UR-totemism has existed, and that its faint contours could be discerned behind the left-over totemic systems fragments of present day’ (ibid, 18). McLennan’s theory was criticised by Taylor (1899) who discarded the confusion of Totemism with simple worship of animals and plants, and viewed Totemism as a relationship between one type of animal and a clan but he did argue with the idea that totems were the basis of religion.

Franz Boas (1916) research was based on North West American Indians and he found a society employing a visual form of Totemism in the form of totem poles. The totem pole was made up of mystical characters from the tribes ancestral past. Item were chosen from nature and used for cultural purposes. Totem poles functioned as an emblem of a clan or family, showing its unity and the rights which each clan were entitled to, and as a reminder of each clan’s link to a spirit ancestor. Totems were also a form of communication as tribes had no written language, so the totem poles were used to tell their stories, legends and events. Totems could not only be for clans they could also be individual however, only the most affluent tribe members could afford to have their own totem carved. Boas (1916) argued against a psychological or historical origin of totemism because its characters could be linked with individuals, and are in every social organisation, appearing in various cultural contexts and would not be possible to fit all totemtistic phenomena into one classification.

The first complete work on totemism was conducted by Sir James Frazer (1919) who developed several theories in regard to the origin of totemism. The first theory suggested that men have totems because they expect benefits from them:

“The connection between a man and his totem is mutually beneficent; the totem protects the man, and the man shows his respect for the totem in various ways, by not killing it if it be an animal, and not cutting or gathering it if it be a plant” (Frazer, 1887, p. 3)

His second theory was that ‘totemism was a system of magic intended to provide a supply of food for someone else’ (Hopkins, 1918, p. 153), this was disregarded in place his final theory which was more radical than the others and based on the fact that:

“Some savages believe their offspring comes not from intercourse between man and woman, but from the spirits of animals or quasi-animals seen by the woman or from the food she eats. They think that the spirits which thus become their children are really the animals they have seen or whose flesh they have eaten before conceiving (ibid, p. 153)

This is what Frazer called the conceptional theory.

Totemism at this point had come under attack from American anthropologist Goldenweiser (1910) who began by listing five key characteristics believed to be symptomatic of totemism, ‘an exogamous clan ( people marry outside of their own social group), the name of the clan derived from the totem, a religious attitude toward the totem; as a “friend” or “brother” or “protector”, taboo’s or restrictions against the killing and eating of the totem, a belief in the decent from the totem’ (ibid, p. 182-83). Goldenweiser (1910) concluded that:

“Each of these traits..displays more or less a striking independence in its distribution; and most of them can be shown to be widely-spread ethnic phenomena, diverse in origin not necessarily coordinated in development, and displaying a rich variability of psychological make-up” (ibid, p.266)

Although not willing to give up the idea totally he proposed an alternative definition of totemism in terms of the association between “definite social units “and “objects and symbols of emotional value” (ibid, p. 275). Lowie (2009) was more radical arguing that totemism did not exist and for all intense and purpose was an invention of anthropologists.

Durkheim in his book The Elementary Forms of Religious Life (1915) presented the most influential interpretation of religion from a functionalist perspective stating society was the soul of religion and was the foundation of all religious beliefs. Durkheim (1961) said all societies divide the world into two categories: the sacred and the profane. Religion is centred on this division; it is a ‘unified system of beliefs and practices related to sacred things, things which are set apart and forbidden’ (Haralambos, 2001, p. 432). Thus to comprehend the role of religion in society, the connection concerning sacred symbols and what they signify must be determined.

Durkheim used the religion of Australian aborigines in order to explain his theory. Durkheim referred to their religion as totemism stating it was the most basic and simplest form of religion. Aboriginal civilisations were divided into numerous clans each having duties and obligations towards their members, one of which is exogamy, where members are not allowed to marry within their clan. Each clan has a totem usually that of an animal or plant which is the emblem of the clan, a sign where each clan can distinguish itself from the others. The totem is the most sacred object in aborigine ritual. The totem is ‘the outward and visible form of the totemic principle of god’ (ibid, p. 432). Durkheim argued ‘if the totem is the symbol of god and society, therefore society and god are one. So people who are worshipping god are in fact worshipping society therefore, society is the real object of religious worship. Sacred things are ‘considered superior in dignity and power to the profane and particularly to man, thus, in relation to sacred things individuals are inferior and dependent’ (p.432).

Durkheim said primitive man came to view society as something sacred because he is totally dependent on it. Furthermore, Durkheim argued ‘the reason why society invents a sacred symbol like a totem is because it is easier for a person to visualise and direct his feelings of awe toward a symbol than towards so complex a thing as a clan’ (ibid, p.433). Durkheim believed in the collective conscience a set of shared values and moral beliefs, religion reinforces the collective conscience. The worship of society strengthens the values and moral beliefs that form the basis of social life. However, Goldenweiser (1910) said:

“The appearance of Durkheim’s brilliant but unconvincing treatise on religion brings home the fact that one of the phases of socio-religious thought, namely the problem of totemism, remains as replete with vagueness and misunderstanding as ever” (ibid, p.288)

Boas (1916) ‘aiming at Durkheim as much as Frazer, denied that cultural phenomena could be bought together into a unity’ (Levi-Strauss, 1969, p. 79).

British anthropologists were less ready to give up on the concept of totemism. Malinowski (1925) gives an uncomplicated analysis of totemism relating to the function it has in a given society. Totemism plays a significant role in the ‘ordering and control of nature by man’ (ibid, p. 22-23). The kind of man’s attention in the totemic species ‘shows also the kind of belief and cult to be there expected. Since it is the desire to control the species, dangerous, useful or edible, this desire must lead to a belief in special power over the species, affinity with it, a common essence between man and beast or plant’ (Malinowski, 1954, p. 45). Totemism as a style of social organisation maintains the status quo in society while as the same time serving as man’s interests in a much deeper way:

“From the survival point of view, it is vital that man’s interest in the practically indispensable species should never abate, that his belief in his capacity to control them should give him strength and endurance in his pursuits and stimulate his observations and knowledge of the habits and natures of animals and plants” (ibid, p. 46)

A criticism of Malinowski is ‘he is guilty of operating entirely within the world of nature and his theory leaves us to explain why totemism, if it responds to human needs is not universal (Leach, 1969, p. 130). Evans-Pritchard (1951) said, ‘Malinowski’s theoretical conclusions are no more than descriptions in more abstract language’ (p.95).

Radcliffe- Brown (1929) explored totemism from a structural functionalist perspective; he did not attempt to understand totemism in terms of beliefs, but as a collection of practices that serve to uphold the solidarity and equilibrium of the social group. Radcliffe- Brown described totemism as that circumstance whereupon:

“Society is divided into groups and there is a special relation between each group and one or more classes of objects that are usually natural species of animals and plants but may occasionally be artificial objects or parts of an animal” (Radcliffe-Brown 1965, p. 117).

Radcliffe-Brown (1965) said totemic objects are objects which have been accorded ritual value (ibid, p. 123) and he argues that:

“Any object or event which has important effects upon the well-being (material or spiritual) of a society, or anything which stands for or represents any such object or event, tends to become an object of the ritual attitude” (Radcliffe-Brown 1965, p. 129).

Here, Radcliffe-Brown comes really near to the utilitarian theories offered by Frazer and Malinowski however; this hypothesis does little to the general understanding of why particular plants and animal species have such a high ritual significance. In a further essay Radcliffe-Brown (1956) highlighted the significance of the conclusions about the relations between humans and animals. Moreover, after listening and examining stories told about animals by Australian aborigines, Radcliffe-Brown concluded they had one theme, and added ‘the resemblances and differences of animal species are translated into terms of friendship and conflict, solidarity and opposition’ Radcliffe-Brown, 1958, p. 116). Overall concluding, ‘the world of animal life is represented in terms of social relations similar to those of human society’ (Radcliffe-Brown, 1958, p.116). Radcliffe-Brown proposed the central terms in his version of totemism are opposition and integration adding Totemism stopped being a type of religion but was instead a mode of thought where nature had become an ‘object of contemplation for the expression of socio-cultural differences’ (Tremlett, 2008, p.47). Radcliffe-brown’s previous idea that ‘objects become totems because they are of ritual interest to society can be turned around: why are they not of ritual interest because they have been designated as totems’? (ibid, p.130). Questions have been asked about the integrity of his studies because some anthropologists have accused him of appropriating other people’s research and passing it off as his own.

The Australian anthropologist Elkin (1933) said there are many forms of totemism in Australia specifically:

“Individual, sex, moiety, section, subsection, matrilineal and patrilineal social clans, localised cult clan and dream-totemism. Elkin denied the unity of totemism but sought to preserve its reality on the condition that he might trace it back to a multiplicity of types he stated there is no longer ‘one totemism but many totemisms, each in itself a single irreducible whole” (p.113).

Elkin (1933) denied ‘the unity in totemism as if he thought it possible to preserve the reality of totemism on condition that it be reduced to a multiplicity of heterogeneous forms’ (Levi-Strauss, 1969, p. 35). For Elkin (1933) there is no longer one totemism but many totemisms, each in itself a single complex whole. Levi-Strauss (1962a) says Elkin ‘instead of helping to slay the hydra (of totemism) has dismembered it and made peace with the bits’ (ibid, p.66).

Evans Pritchard in his book on Nuer religion (1956) regarded totemism as ‘a symbolic formulation of intellectually constructed relationships, (Strauss, 1962. p. 27). He wanted to comprehend totemism in terms of extensive Nuer Beliefs about Kwoth which stands for “God” or “Spirit”; there were two manifestations of spirit, higher and lower, with the totemic spirit being the ‘spirit of the below’. Evans Pritchard noted that Nuer totems were not symbols of linages, because some linages had none and other linages shared the same totem but did not otherwise acknowledge kinship with each-other. Nor did the totems signify Spirit as such, but rather the connection between God and a specific linage. So, such a study fixed totemism within the religious beliefs and practices of a particular society.

Levi-Strauss was very critical of the reality of totemism for him ‘the ‘totemic illusion’ is the product of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century effort by scientists to relegate the primitive outside the realm of culture’ (Leach, 1962, p. 127) because they wanted to ‘protect the Victorian world-view by maintaining the Christian distinction between man and nature, thus, by failing to recognise the similarities between Western and primitive codes, scholars created false taxonomies and blurred the universal logic behind all so-called totemic phenomena’ (ibid, p. 127). Levi-Strauss was inspired by Radcliffe-Brown, whose analyses he attempted to expand upon. Levi-Strauss was ‘the leading academic in contemporary structuralism believing human minds have certain universal characteristics which originate in the common feature of the homo-sapiens brain’ (Haralambos, 2001, p. 910). These common mental structures lead people everywhere to think similarly regardless of their society or cultural background. Levi-Strauss developed a system to show the abstract divisions that he saw in totemism as a phenomenon in human nature. His system was implemented in a table of oppositions or mutual relationships. The basic relationship was between the binary opposites such as nature and culture. On one side there were in nature certain realities such as species of animal, or plants and specific animals and plants. On the other side, there was in culture various groups and individuals who identify themselves with particular species or with specific animal and plants. Levi-Strauss (1962a) noticed four types of relationship between nature and culture within totemism:

“A species of animal or plant identified with a certain group; a species identified with an individual and finally a particular animal or plant identified with a group of animal or plant identified with an individual, a particular animal or plant’ (p.18).

Levi-Strauss (1969) stated each of these four groupings ‘correspond to the phenomena that are to be seen in one people to another’ (ibid. 84). For the first grouping he suggested the Australians, for whom ‘natural entities are linked with cultural groups (p.84); the second grouping was ‘the individual totemism of North American Indians where an individual is linked with a species of nature’ (p.84). The third grouping the ‘Mota people from the Bank Irelands of Melanesia named: a child is thought to be the incarnation of a specific animal, plant or creature which was found and eaten by the mother when she first found out she was pregnant(p.84). The final groupings were from ‘Polynesia or Africa where fixed individual animals formed the groups support and worshbluefrost13ip’ (p.84). In conclusion Levi-Strauss stated the difference between the classes of man and animal serves as the conceptual basis for social differences. Thus, for Levi-Strauss totemism is an ‘illusion’ and a logic that ‘classifies’- a post hoc explanation in which the structure of social relations is projected onto the natural phenomena, not taken from it.

In conclusion, totemism is a belief system where the traits in the social organisation of people are believed to have kinship or a mystical relationship with a spirit-being such as an animal or plant which serves as the group or individual’s emblem or symbol. As anthropology tries to understand different cultures and provides knowledge about cultural variation in the world through details studies anthropologist would find totemism an interesting topic which has been proved by the number of studies which have been discussed. The first study on totemism was undertaken my McLennan in (1889) who explored the origin of totemism. Boas (1916) studied American Indians and their totem poles, concluding the totem poles functioned as the emblem of the clan showing unity and the rights each clan was entitled to. Frazer (1919) gave the first comprehensive work on totemism; he came up with three theories the final of which saw the origin of totemism as an interpretation of the conception and birth of children a belief he called conceptionalism. Durkheim (1915) hoped to discover a pure religion in a very ancient form and claimed to see the origin of religion in totemism. In 1925 Malinowski explored totemism as a function in a given society. Radcliffe-Brown (1929) researched from a structural functionalist perspective explored how totemism upheld the solidarity of the social group. Elkin (1933) explored numerous forms of totemism. Evans-Pritchard (1956) explored Nuer religion and the symbolic nature of totemism. The final theory discussed on totemism was by Levi-Strauss (1962a/1969) who explored totemism from a structuralist perspective. He gave the most incisive critique of totemism by denying its reality stating totemism is an illusion. Investigations of totemism has decline in recent times, those which have been undertaken have moved away from its universality toward explorations which consider totem structures in a more precise context.

Romantic relationships are characterized by feelings of passion, emotional reactions and physical attraction; and platonic relationships are characterized by the absence of physical attraction, passion or sex (Sippola, 1999). These two characterizations are very important for the scope of this paper because both are crucial to answer the question, “Can men and women really be just friends?” In the magazine Psychology Today, Clifford Lazarus wrote an article with an explanation to this question. Lazarus contends, for the most part, purely platonic relationships for heterosexual men and women are a myth (Lazarus, 2010). To support his contention, he refers to the reflexive nature of men and the reflective nature of women.

Lazarus refers to a sexual desirability reflex, which men demonstrate towards women in prime reproductive age. This reflex suggests the immediate thoughts of males when first encountering females are whether or not he would like to have sex with her (Lazarus, 2010). Although, it is argued that females may exhibit the same thoughts, although not as frequently as with males, they tend to quickly move past this reflex. On the other hand, women generally want to determine the suitability of a potential partner. This suitability is referred to as a desire to look for potential long term, socioeconomic stability with a partner (Canary & Dindia, 1998). Women therefore, tend to be more sexually reflective and choosier than males, while males tend to be more sexually reflexive than women.

These reflexive and reflective drives can be linked to evolutionary theories. Males have an indefinite amount of sperm while females only have a predetermined amount of eggs for her life span (Lazarus, 2010). This suggests an explanation of why males may exhibit the above mentioned reflex more than females, and why females exhibit a determinable reflective drive. This article therefore concludes that purely platonic relationships in cross-sex friendships do not exist. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast the conclusion of the Psychology Today article with scholarly research to determine if purely platonic cross-sex friendships can exist between heterosexual men and women.

It is important to indicate that the article’s conclusion assumes that a purely platonic relationship exists when both people in the relationship have never considered having a romantic relationship with each other. Through sexually charged flirtatious behavior and evolutionary theories, the first part of this paper will provide support for the article’s conclusion that purely platonic cross-sex friendships are not possible. However, the second part of this paper will present evidence denouncing the preceding hypothesis by means of costs, romantic intentions and reasons to stay platonic.

Flirtatious Behavior

Both romantic and platonic relationships report flirtatious activity although frequencies in flirtatious behavior may differ (Egland, Spitzberg, & Zormeier, 1996). Some examples of flirtatious behaviors include looking your friend or partner up and down, gazing in their eyes and smiling suggestively. When comparing results of the platonic cross-sex relationships to the romantic cross-sex relationships, platonic relationships engaged in flirtatious activity nearly as much as romantic relationships (Egland, et al., 1996). This finding bolsters the view that even in platonic relationships, flirtatious behavior is expressed.

Furthermore, flirtatious behavior may be sexually charged. According to Henningsen, Braz, and Davies (2008), people engage in flirtatious behavior for six main reasons. First is sexual motivation, referring to one’s desires to engage in sexual acts. Second, an individual may be relationally motivated, with the intention of moving from a platonic relationship to a romantic relationship. Third is fun motivation, referring to flirting to gain sexual excitement or thrill. Fourth is exploring motivation, referring to flirtatious behavior of platonic relationships to explore and see if positive feedback comes from the other person. Fifth is esteem motivation, which remarks on how gaining positive feedback from flirting may boost self esteem or arousal. And finally people flirt for instrumental motivation, which is flirting for possible access to rewards.

Flirting is the primary apparatus to signal sexual and romantic accessibility (Guererro & Chavez, 2005). All of the reasons people may flirt are charged with motives other than being platonic. Flirtation can be described as a “subcategory of social-sexual communication” (Henningsen, et al., 2008, p. 2). These social-sexual communications carry the connotation of being sexually charged, suggesting one person may have had sexual or romantic thoughts at one point in time in the relationship. This suggests that flirting is associated with sexual desire, or reasons other than what constitutes a platonic friendship (Henningsen, Braz, & Davies, 2008).

Flirtatious behavior is often intended to be interpreted in a way that carries sexual motive (Henningsen, et al., 2008). This implies that those in platonic relationships have an intended purpose or conscious motive to engage in it. For instance, platonic relationships that do not want to turn romantic voluntarily do not engage in flirtatious behavior (Guerrero & Mongeau, 2008). This suggests that platonic relationships may be conscious of flirting, thus indicating that people engage in flirting through a particular motivation; in these instances a sexually charged motivation. Since platonic relationships do engage in flirtatious behavior with one another, there is reason to believe that the flirtatious behavior is sexually charged

Furthermore, men may interpret expressed behavior from women differently than from what women intend. If women are not voluntarily trying to give flirtatious signals or signs of flirtatious behavior, men are much more readily apparent to interpret non-flirtatious signals as flirtatious (Canary & Dindia, 1998). Therefore, even in an apparently platonic friendship, men may be misinterpreting these non-flirtatious signals as flirtatious, and therefore sexual as well, even if there is no intension to communicate flirtatious behavior. This implies even in some apparently platonic relationships, certain behaviors may signal signs of sexual desire unintentionally. CHECK THESE PRECEDING 3 PARAGRAPHS

Evolutionary Views

According to evolutionary theories, flirtatious behavior is contingent upon a desire to procreate (Canary & Dindia, 1998). As mentioned in the article, men have a type of reflexive drive and women have a type of reflective drive (Lazarus, 2010). From an evolutionary stance, a look into interactions between men and women will reinforce these reflexive and reflective drives.

Reflective and Reflexive Behavior

Women are more likely to choose a partner or mate who exhibits status and resources, therefore being more reflective than males (Lazarus, 2010). Women are generally more interested in men with high resource potential (Canary & Dindia, 1998). This indicates why women focus on a long term stable relationship; one which is able to support their offspring. On the other hand, men are much more likely to approach women who display more signs of flirtatious behavior (Canary & Dindia, 1998). This indicates men’s reflexive drive, indicating sexual thoughts or interest upon initial encounters (Lazarus, 2010).

Interests of men and women vary depending on age group. Males prefer younger women, while women prefer older males as age ascends. Women tend to be more fertile when they are younger, while men tend to be more economically sufficient and successful as they grow older (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2009). This suggests men being more concerned with the fertility of women by preferring younger mates, while women reported being more concerned with male socioeconomic status, indicated by selecting older men (Alterovitz & Mendelsohn, 2009).

Parental Investment Theory

Additionally, the female perception of older males having the resources to provide for their offspring and males having the impression to mate with a fertile female is consistent with the evolutionary theory of parental investments. Under parental investment theory, the investments of men and women differ. For example, a women needs to carry the offspring. On the other hand, men could technically end their investment of the offspring immediately after conception. As referenced by Tafoya (2006), women’s potential for reproduction after conception is inhibited, while on the other hand men as quoted by Lazarus (2010), have their sperm “constantly replenished.” Furthermore, because of the paternity uncertainty hypothesis, a man can never know with absolute certainty that a child is his. On the contrary, even though the mother may not know who the father of her child is, this hypothesis holds that she will know for certain that she will pass her genes on to her offspring (Tafoya, 2006).

Considering this hypothesis and the theory of parental investments, the reflexive nature of men and reflective nature of women are explained. A male’s reflexive drive can be explained since males never know if the child is theirs with absolute certainty and their investment need not go beyond conception (Tafoya, 2006). Therefore, males seem to exhibit lesser commitment, reinforcing their reflexive tendencies. Additionally, men are more likely to accept a short term mate of any overall quality than women. For instance, it is more probable that men rather than women select a short term mate whose overall qualities such as wealth, status and attractiveness are lacking. Men are also more likely than women to have a one night stand or participate in an affair (Li & Kenrick, 2006).

On the other hand, women know their genes will be passed on and are making more of a sacrifice from an evolutionary standpoint by the cessation of their potential reproduction. This indicates that females may be more selective about their mates as indicated in the article by reflective drives. Furthermore, women prefer resources and status when looking for a short term mate more than males. In fact, women prefer the same qualities in their short term mates as they do in their long term mates (Li & Kenrick, 2006). This implies women exemplify this reflective drive in support of a potential parental investor, that being the potential mate. It is shown that mating as well as parenting is essential to success of offspring, which helps to explain the characteristics of these reflexive and reflective drives (Tafoya, 2006). However, evolutionary views not limited to parental investment theory.

Friends with Benefits and Biosocial Theory

Evolutionary theories are evident in friends with benefits relationships. Friends with benefits refer to non-romantic or platonic relationships who engage in sexual activities (McGinty, Knox, & Zusman, 2007). Friends with benefits is not just a trend, but also is commonly engaged in. Nearly 60% of undergraduates reported having had an experience with a friends with benefits relationship (McGinty et al., 2007). This reinforces the instinctive sexual activity and sexual behavior with the opposite sex. Biosocial theory of evolution may inquire more deeply as to why friends with benefits occurs.

Biosocial Theory predicts human behavior by looking to a person’s genetic predisposition and their environment. Women show to be more emotionally involved in a friend with benefits relationship than men. Because women emphasize emotional attachment, it is argued that women do so in order to have a stable relationship (McGinty et al., 2007). In having a stable relationship, women need to rear their offspring, thus suggesting why women are more emotionally concerned with friends with benefits relationships than men. On the other hand, men are more sexually focused with the relationship. At times, men are shown to be involved in multiple friends with benefits relationships, thus strengthening the point that men exhibit a reflexive drive (McGinty et al., 2007).

Furthermore, Schneider & Kenny (2000) surveyed how rewarding and costly people see an opposite-sex platonic friendship. Sexual access was reported as a potential benefit of being in a cross-sex friendship, as well as a reported cost. For example, men may be friends with women as a means to gain sexual access, however, men report having less sexual access than women. This suggests men are more concerned with sexual access than women (Bleske & Buss, 2000). This reinforces the idea of the reflexive nature of men.

However, women are reported to be benefited when protected by an opposite sex friend. Though this is not shown to what extent this suggests a positive cue for women as mate potential, it has been suggested in a comparative study that males who protect their friends actually gain more sexual access. This was evident in a study of baboons, where the males protect the feeding grounds, and in return the female gives them periodic sexual access; therefore suggesting men’s evolutionary drive for protecting women (Bleske & Buss, 2000).

Flirtatious behavior and evolutionary views support the reflexive and reflective tendencies of males and females, respectively. This suggests that men and women in platonic cross-sex friendships engage in sexually charged behavior. The preceding information also supports, as the article contends, that platonic relationships may not be feasible simply because of evolutionary drives (Lazarus, 2010).

Although these findings reinforce the idea that purely platonic relationships do not exist, there is information to believe otherwise. The following research in categories of similar costs, romantic intent, and reasons to stay platonic indicate evidence against the preceding research, contending there may be reasons platonic relationships can exist without having intent for or a transition to romantic relationships.

Similar Costs and Status

Males and Females do not differ in how costly it is to be denied sex from the person in the friendship; the potential for rejection is perceived as low in cost for both sexes (Bleske & Buss, 2000). This suggests that men and women may be able to be friends without worrying about sexual access. However, this information does support males and/or females think about sex. Since the potential cost for rejection was low, this implies the male and females evaluated each other before making the decision to become romantic (Bleske & Buss, 2000). Therefore, this seems to be more closely related to the conclusion in the article, and more supportive of reflexive and reflective behavior than not.

Even so, the status of the relationship may have an effect on the friendship. Although, ex-romantic partners report wanting a platonic relationship to turn romantic once again, a friend who has always been platonic would not want the relationship to turn romantic (Schneider & Kenny, 2000). This indicates that how a relationship is initiated may have an actual impact on the relationship. Platonic friendships therefore, may exist depending on past experiences with the individual. This undermines the contention that platonic cross-sex friendships can never be platonic, since past experience can have an impact.

Romantic Intent

Romantic intent was not classified in the above article Why Men and Women Can’t be “Just Friends”. Romantic intent can vary and impact relationships differently. In the strictly platonic relationships, cross-sex friends reported less contact, flirtation and activity compared to romantic relationships. Arguably, strictly platonic friendships do not flirt, touch and spend as much time with one another relative to mutually romantic relationships, possibly because doing so may jeopardize the friendship (Guererro & Chavez, 2005). Furthermore, long term strictly platonic friendships can move past initial romantic intent. Friendships in the long term are shown to use maintenance behaviors such as less contact and flirtation as a means to not potentially ruin the platonic friendship (Guererro & Chavez, 2005). These finding suggests strictly platonic and mutually romantic relationships do vary with romantic intent, and thus may not perceive one another as anything more than platonic friends.

Reasons to Remain Platonic

There are six motives as to why relationships should remain platonic. To safeguard the relationship, lack of or no attraction, network disapproval, third party, risk aversion and timeout. This order with safeguarding the relationship being most important implies that there is an intrinsic reason for relationships to remain purely platonic. The rewarding nature of the relationship may be seen as more rewarding than a relationship moving towards one that is romantic or sexual. For instance, a reward in a platonic relationship is the ability to share emotion and/ or gain support about external situations; the ability to disclose in the relationship. On the other hand, less rewarding factors may direct people to remain platonic as well. For example, one may feel that the friend in the relationship is not attractive, or one may not want to expose oneself to possible emotional instability (Messman, Canary, & Hause, 2000). Thus, research suggests cross-sex platonic relationships may have strong reasons for existing.

Furthermore, all platonic friendships may not be sexually charged. The sexual challenge in cross-sex friendships, which refers to men and women being hardwired to be sexually attracted to one another, is said to only occur in a minority of cross-sex friendships. Furthermore, the sexual challenge may be linked to attraction of the spirit, rather than of the body. Thus, reinforcing that sexual challenges may not be accurately represented when referring to the sexual desire of men and women (Messman et al., 2000).

Conclusion

Flirtatious behavior and evolutionary theories strongly support the idea that there cannot be purely platonic relationships as indicated in the article. However, alternative research suggests platonic friendships may be possible; similar costs, subjective romantic intent, and reasons to remain reasons to remain platonic are evidence that friendships have some incentive to remain purely platonic. Although there is support for both sides, the underlying question is whether men and women together can have purely platonic friendships. Flirtatious behaviors as well as the evolutionary theories of biosocial and parental investment demonstrate that cross-sex platonic friendships are challenging. The majority of the information in the Why Men and Women Can’t be “Just Friends” article does give credence to the majority of these findings.

Although in light of these findings, the article seems to be narrow in its evaluation. The main point of the article contends that platonic relationships do not exist because of evolutionary reasoning based on reflexive and reflective drives (Lazarus, 2010). On the other hand, the article does not account for romantic intent, a significant part of relationships. The article assumes based on the first meeting of men and women that there are uncontrollable biological reactions which occur. Although these reactions tend to happen, the article should still account for the past and present status of the relationship, as well as each person’s intent to whether or not they want a platonic or romantic friendship. Since the article fails to account for this romantic intent of a males and females, it therefore neglects the possibility of differences in perception; that is, how people view each other based on their past experience with that person (Messman et al., 2000).

Moreover, long term platonic friendships vary in their romantic intent depending if maintenance behaviors are used. For instance, in a relationship that has always been platonic, both persons will use more maintenance behaviors to preserve their platonic friendship, in order to safeguard the friendship from moving towards romanticism. However, maintenance behaviors are also shown not to be useful. For instance, one of the people in the relationship may be denied a desired sexual progression (Guererro & Chavez, 2005).

Although there can be changes made to the article, the underlying argument is supported by the majority of research. Assuming a purely platonic relationship to be a cross-sex friendship where neither party has the thought of addressing a romantic relationship, or having desire for sexual activities; the existence of purely platonic relationships is slim. Platonic relationships engaging in flirtatious behavior carry a sexual connotation (Egland, et al., 1996). This implies that males and females even in platonic relationships may exhibit these reflexive and reflective drives. Furthermore, the differing parental investments for males and females bolster the sentiment regarding reflexive and reflective drives; this concerns why males invest less in their relationships while females invest more in their relationships (Li & Kenrick, 2006; Tafoya, 2006). Additionally, the biosocial theory suggests evolutionary underpinnings consistent with reflexive and reflective behavior; these include sexual behavior in friends with benefits relationships and behaviors of rewards and costs. Therefore, the article and the preceding findings suggest that the existences of purely platonic cross-sex heterosexual relationships are unlikely.

Part of the current feminism strive is to raise awareness of what is known as rape culture. Rape culture is a socially constructed concept that depicts a culture in which sexual violence and rape are belittled, tolerated, and even justified in society. This concept is related to some specific behaviors such as women’s causal role, rape stereotypes, sexual objectification, and trivialization of rape along with sexual discrimination.

Legally, rape is defined as forced sexual intercourse between a man and a woman against the woman’s will (or the man’s). In many states, the legal definition of rape does not include marital rape. In others terms, husbands which force their wives into sex are not punished by law, as rape is only seen as “illegitimate” sexual intercourse, i.e., the wife’s exception implies that “rape is rape” if and only if the man commits the act on a woman other than his wife. This would suggest that sexual violence is not always considered as an act of rape. Even more, this implies that the law might consider sexual assaults as tolerable. For a forced sexual act to be sanctioned as rape, the man should not have conjugal rights over the woman. In other terms, the law’s acceptance of a violent sexual act depends on the relationship between the victim and her rapist.

According to the feminists’ rape culture theory, sexist behaviors contribute to the normalization of sexual assaults towards women. The root of rape culture is -according to the theory- the objectification and domination of women in a highly patriarchal society. Rape culture exists today because of the socially constructed image of sex as being an act of male domination over women. It is the traditional perception of how men and women are to behave which is the cause of rape being so trivialized. Men are expected to have sexual dominance in the relationship whereas women are pictured as passive, subordinate creatures.

The contrast between men and women in the socially constructed sexual culture can be seen in dating for instance. In a date, a man is expected to buy gifts, dinner, drive the date of/from location to location and shower the woman with attention. Society has accustomed men to expect sexual rewards for their actions. The man thinks he has a right to sexual favors because of what he did on the date. This reasoning puts women as legitimate for sexual aggressions, and gives justifications for men to reason what they might do. When society produces rapists by encouraging values such as domination, anger, aggression, violence and rejecting the idea of men expressing and sharing their feelings, it fosters a rape culture.

The rapists are also victims in the sense that they are frustrated by not being able to nurture their need for love and affection through more normal, healthier ways; hence acting through violence. [1]

Social conditioning through media holds a huge part of responsibility in rape culture oriented societies. Men and women are made to behave and think in a very specific way from a very early age through school and popular culture. Women and girls should act properly and in a “ladylike” manner, men should be strong and unemotional. This socialization process, this distribution of roles and behaviors creates the imbalance of power between men and women, giving the floor to male domination over female subordination, and indirectly training women how to be raped, and men how to be rapists.

Some rules which train women “how to be ladies” actually contribute to a lot of rape situations. For instance, a “lady” should not make a scene just because she is at discomfort. During a sexual assault, wouldn’t this entitle that the woman should stay quiet, in order to preserve ladylike qualities? A “lady” should always trust and be kind to strangers which offer to help. This rule gives rapists plenty of situations where they can trick women into thinking that they are actually willing to help them whilst having planned the rape act. Another rule claims that a “lady” should always graciously smile when spoken to. A potential rapist might consider a woman acknowledging him with a smile as her being consenting to the situation.

Social conditioning has also leaded us to deem as true a set of prejudicial beliefs, called rape myths. These stereotypes provide aggressors with justifications and legitimization for their acts of sexual violence. Feminists claim that rape myths are fundamental to the patriarchal society which supports control and domination relationships. Not only do those stereotypes and lies present assaulters with excuses for their acts, but they also move the responsibility of the act away from the aggressors and lay it on the victims.

Some examples of rape myths include: “Black men rape white women”, “Provocative female clothing is the cause of rape”, “it’s the victim’s fault”, “She was asking for it”… Even more dangerous is women’s acceptance as the ones to blame for rape and the hostility some women show towards other women which were rape victims, by saying and believing in claims such as “She provoked the rape”, “Men are unable to control themselves”, “rape is only perpetrated by sick men”. [2]

The new trend nowadays, and from what I hear around me when I ask people about the causal role of women in a rape situation is to say that women should not dress in an alluring way then blame men for raping them. Society is full of sick men, and women should be prepared for this. Raped women actually “had it coming”.

A study done in Germany where participants (students) were given a set of questions, tried to measure to which extent rape myths were accepted and it tried to study the correlation between the desire for sexual dominance and the inclination to accept rape and rape myths. The results of this study supported the feminist theory which claims that rape is much more linked to the desire for men to express their dominance and control over women than to simple sexual arousal. [3]

There are three main theories which suggest different factors as support for the proliferation of rape culture.

The first theory, gender disparity, claims that rape is the main instrument for patriarchal societies to keep oppression and control. As discussed earlier, the imbalance of power in the relationship between men and women is a direct cause of the objectification and subordination of women versus the domination and demonstration of force of men, which encourages rapist behavior.

The second theory, cultural overflow, claims that rape myths and gender socialization are not the only causes for sexual violence, as other components of culture might serve to justify and trivialize rape. An example would be the aspects of violence in our everyday life. Violence in schools, in media, and in governments can be generalized or extended to relationships, thus condoning rape acts.

The third theory, social disturbance, suggests that elevated rates of rape might reflect disturbance in social lives such as divorce and relocation. A generalization of the theory would be that deviant acts in general mirror social disorganization which disturbs commonly agreed on social mores. [4]

Although I agree with the fact that feminists have done well in raising awareness against rape in societies, and (to some extent) to how society might have contributed to the increase of rape rates through popular culture and mass media, I think there are some issues with rape culture as an entity proposed by traditional feminists.

Traditional feminists’ rape culture theory mainly insists on gender imbalance as being the cause of rape proliferation in society. However, and as the cultural overflow theory suggests, other factors and other components might cause increase in rape rates.

The war in Bosnia (92-95) was infamously known for wartime rape. Many Muslim women in Bosnia were raped by Serbs at the time. Rape becomes a weapon of war in this case. It is not intentionally or (at the least solely) directed towards the individual victim, but rather used as any other tool to hurt the enemy.

The rape during the Yugoslav conflicts was consequently labeled as “genocide rape” or “rape warfare”. Many examples in India, South Asian, and Middle Eastern and South African countries show similar patterns where the culture of war and violence tends to lead to a tacit acceptance of rape in society. [5]

Rape as a war weapon can be much more effective than any other weapon as the lasting effects of such an act not only hurt the individual on the long term but the society as a whole. Through children born in time of rape warfare, the society is relentlessly reminded of the war and the enemy. It is one of the most degrading and brutal attacks that could be carried on the enemy. Victims of rape in war time live in isolation from their family and community, especially if they have a child born from the rape act. [6]

Another issue with the traditionalist feminist view on rape is the binary structure and the rather monolithic perspective on the matter. There is this tendency to represent men as evil animalistic rapist creatures and women as helpless submissive victims.

The feminist cause is first and foremost a fight for equality. As a movement which condemns rape as a result of gender inequality, the irony here is the separation between genders which label the man as a rapist and the woman as a victim. The theory depicts all men as potential rapists and sex offenders, controlling and dominant. Across my research, I noticed that most of the literature on rape culture only highlights female oriented violence. Such discrepancy makes it appear as if male oriented violence does not exist, and that female victims are much more prevalent. Such unfairness in research contributes to the rigid binary representation of the matter.

The danger in doing such propaganda (i.e. labeling all men are potential sexual aggressors) makes it sound as if being a man is enough to identify the person as someone likely to rape. Even the definitions I encountered on feminist blogs and journals define rape as the act of sexual violence towards a woman by a man without her consent, but not vice versa. A similar distortion can be seen when talking about domestic violence as it is now assumed and taken for granted that men are wife beaters. While feminism’s original strive is to gain and maintain equality between the genders, rape culture theories create a serious loophole as such distortions and discrepancies actually put women as the harmless gender on higher grounds for moral superiority in comparison with men as the harmful gender, which creates gender imbalance all over again.

By acting as such, feminists work against their goal of gender equality. It is not the battle for equal rights anymore; it is the fight for moral superiority that is at stake here.

Hence as much as rape culture following the feminist view trivializes and encourages rape, rape culture also benefits this feminist view itself of men being animalistic and unable to control their urges in comparison with women because, somehow, it puts women as the “species” in control of their instincts, the civilized ones, while men are pictured as helpless uncontrollable creatures. The situation is reversed. Men become the persecuted gender in a way.

A third issue with rape culture is the labeling itself of the entity. What does rape culture exactly encapsulates? There is a concern that the focus of feminists on rape culture might exclude other abused victims which were not subject to rape but other types of sexual violence.

For instance, domestic violence victims’ doesn’t necessarily mean rape victims. Aren’t those women excluded from the movement because of the fact that they were not raped? Sexually harassed women are not necessarily raped too, where do they stand in the rape culture movement? By choosing a label and identifying an entity such as rape culture, Rape acquires a special place in the feminist movement, as women who were raped gain a unique status which makes them a priority over other women.

The problem here is that, by giving rape this privileged status, by making the focus rape and rape culture, the feminist movement creates this gender-separatist, discriminatory entity which shadows other gender related issues. Other society problems are as important as the rape issue, yet we do not have a “child molesting culture” entity for instance.

Furthermore, one can actually draw a pattern of similarities between the feminist’ rape culture movement and the traditional white feminist movement, because both are discriminatory in a way. The white feminist movement does not represent black and Latino women for instance. Similarly, rape culture feminists do not represent battered women or women who were not raped but were still victims of sexual harassment.

Rape culture oriented feminism does have some good arguments as socially constructed behaviors and gender roles do impact on rape behaviors. However, and to draw the analogy with the white feminist movement, victimized women which were raped as a product of the imbalance of power between men and women in society represent only a small part of the rape victims and situations, as much as white desperate housewives with college degrees who are forced to stay at home only represent a small portion of oppressed women.

Just as white feminism should evolve to include other women in the group, rape culture oriented feminism should also change by broadening its area of interest and not limiting itself only to first: physically raped victims and second : physically raped victims outside the sample society provided by rape culture oriented feminism. Wartime rape victims, which are ignored by this feminist movement currently should also be part of the strive. Furthermore, the movement should also reconsider the monolithic view it gives of society which separates men and women in a negative way. Rape culture oriented literature so far is very biased in terms of who does the aggressions. It should also recognize that not all men are aggressors, because of the unfairness and incorrectness of such accusation, and move towards a more cooperative image between the genders rather than the hatred one it currently gives.

Work cited:

Herman, Dianne F. “The Rape Culture”. In Women, A Feminist Perspective, edited by Jo Freeman, 45 – 53. Mayfield: Mountain View CA, 1984.

Sparkleallday. “Defining A Rape Culture”. Accessed November 28, 2012. http://www.mcdonalds.com/corp/about/factsheets.html.

Anderson, Janet. “Rape Myths”. Research & Advocacy Digest. 9 (2007): 10-21.

Baron, Larry. “Four Theories of Rape: A Macrosociological Analysis”. Social Problems. 34 (1987).

Hayden, Robert M. Rape and Rape Avoidance in Ethno-National Conflicts: Sexual Violence in Liminalized States”. American Anthropologist 102 (2000): 27 – 41.

Clifford, Cassandra. “Rape as a Weapon of War and its Long-term Effects on Victims and Society”. Paper presented at the 7th Global Conference of Violence and the Contexts of Hostility, Budapest, Hungary May 5-7, 2008.

Slavery and segregation played a major role in the amount of racism and inequalities in America. During slavery times, Whites had the power to purchase Blacks and land. If the Blacks were fortunate enough to be able to accumulate the money, they were able to purchase their and their families freedom. (Oliver and Shapiro 278, 1995) However, this seldom occurred due to the fact that it was very hard for Blacks to gain any money while in slavery. During the Jim Crow segregation in the south, there were laws prohibiting Blacks from operating businesses on an open market, meaning that they were not allowed to sell their products to Whites. (Bobo and Smith 187, 1998) They were at a disadvantage because they could not make the profit that they deserved simply due to their skin color. After the segregation, Whites were still not willing to help out and purchase from Black businesses. Because of this, Blacks were forced to focus mainly on selling to the Black community. Since the Blacks were very limited on what they could sell, this caused them to be more like a consumer than an owner. Since past generations of Blacks had to endure this racism and inequality, their poverty has been passed down from generation to generation; families have been unable to or struggling to get out of the debt of their ancestors. Each disadvantage that the Black community as a whole has had to endure has accumulated over time creating the sedimentation of inequality. Whites have gained more advantages over time simply resulting from the disadvantages that the Blacks have gone through.

The restriction of access to schools, jobs, healthcare, and public services are products of segregation. The freedom of choice restricted from the Blacks has been legally sound while progressing through the centuries but has always been immoral. In 1988, only 50% of White Americans favored a law prohibiting racial discrimination in housing sales and rentals. (Farley and Squires 221, 2005) Housing policies, programs, and practices have played a large role in the gap of wealth between Blacks and Whites. In 1939, the FHA manual prohibited granting loans to families due to race. (Fischer 140, 1996) This meant that they didn’t want to ‘disrupt the racial integrity’ of a neighborhood. They wanted neighborhoods to be occupied by the same racial and social classes to ‘retain stability’. During the 1940’s, the FHA recommended that developers use covenants that were racially restrictive to ‘protect’ from people of color. (Fischer 140, 1996) Because of this, Blacks and other people of color could not buy homes in most of the neighborhoods that Whites lived in; the middle class communities. In the 1940’s, the government began helping families buy homes by backing the loans. In order to get a loan, the house had to be in a neighborhood that was in the top two of four categories. The assessors used a red pen to circle the neighborhoods that fell into the bottom two categories. This was called redlining, and the neighborhoods that fell into these bottom categories were primarily Black neighborhoods. These neighborhoods were ineligible for the loans which caused racial segregation throughout cities. Also, Blacks could not buy homes in the most affordable neighborhoods. Public housing projects were built in the redlined communities. The 1949 Housing Act was a renewal program that was aimed to get rid of the inner city ghettoes, and to remove many people from their homes by condemning them, forcing them into public housing. The majority affected by this were Blacks. The Whites then began to leave cities and move to the suburbs, bringing the middle-class jobs with them. Racially restrictive covenants were ruled illegal in 1948, yet they were not enforced by the FHA until 1950. (Fischer 141, 1998) This meant that communities were able to segregate based on color without issue. Once racial segregation was made illegal within neighborhoods, ‘White Flight’ became an issue. White flight was when White families would leave neighborhoods when a person of color would move in because they thought that they would lower the property value and the overall value of the neighborhood. Although this was legal, the morals behind it were cruel and unethical causing racism to spread more and causing the gap to widen.

The media and the overall sense of racism within communities played a large role in the gap of wealth and social standing between Whites and people of color. The media has often portrayed Blacks as lazy and not wanting work. Also, in many cases the media has portrayed Black women as welfare reliant, wanting to ‘have babies to receive welfare checks’. This was because of AFDC, a welfare program that seemed to give incentive to women to have children so that they could gain more welfare benefits. (Week 5 &6 PowerPoint, slide 54) AFDC also was only available to single parents which caused the split of many Black families because of their need for money. However, the fact that Black women were believed to take advantage of this was a racial stigma spread by the media. This has caused the people and viewers to grow to learn these racist and biased opinions. Although the act of being racist can be the belief that one race is superior to another, it can also be colorblind. This means that there is a direct avoidance and acknowledgement of race. If one is a ‘Colorblind Racist’, they neglect that there have been and still are inequalities that need attention. (Silva 132, 2001) Nowadays, people may believe that they are not being racist if they completely rule out the fact that there is race, which causes them to not pay attention to the fact that there are racial inequalities. Presently, there are still many racial inequalities contributing the gap in wealth between Whites (and in some occasions Asians) and people of color. These issues still need to be addressed in order to lessen the gap. Another type of racism that is contributing to the neglect is Laissez Faire racism where excuses are made to try to justify why the injustices are still present. The “structures of investment opportunity” the racialization of the state attribute to the tremendous inequality in wealth between Whites and people of color. Structural racism is embedded in social structures such as laws and policies. New Deal legislation such as Social Security systematically excluded Blacks in the earlier years. As welfare recipients became viewed as primarily Black and undeserving, welfare benefits became political targets and antipoverty programs were cut. TANF was a state-funded welfare program that gave the state control of who is eligible to receive welfare. This enabled the state to be racially selective and caused families to deplete all resources to gain aid.

The gap of wealth between Blacks and Whites has been prevalent for centuries. The past events and laws have contributed to the current racial inequalities. Slavery and segregation, housing sales and restrictions, and state-funded welfare all add to the current state of discriminations and imbalances of race in our communities. If these issues were assessed more accurately and unbiased, we could potentially close the gap between Blacks and Whites and finally have an equal society.

The issues surrounding Race, Class and Gender in the United States have long been fraught with conflict. Rothenberg (2007) explores the themes surrounding the issues of race, class, and gender through a variety of secondary sources. The three themes that this paper will explore are (a) the formation and definition of differences, (b) historical accounts of race, class and gender, (c) and suggestions for moving beyond racism, sexism, and classism.

Formation and Definition of Differences

A primary theme in Rothenberg’s (2007) book is the formation and definition of differences. Sections I-IV constructs the basis on how society in the United States construct differences in the areas of race, class, and gender and helps the reader to think about the meaning of racism, classism and sexism (p. 3). Section I contains readings that investigates how White privilege was developed by the construction of racial differences among the European settlers, slaves and natives to create a division of labor. Also discussed was how there developed a greater distinction among Jewish immigrants and how they were grafted into the White majority and other immigrants after World War II. Section I-IV of Rothenberg’s (2007) book also discusses the construction of gender and how differences in gender have created differences in the division of labor, pay, and gender roles and stereotypes. A great part in the development of gender identity development is the heterosexual and homosexual question. Throughout these sections I was challenged on what it means to be a White female in American society. The way that society has formed the definition of differences among race, class and sex caused me to feel somewhat ashamed and saddened by the way differences plays a role in everyday life even when we don’t think that they do. The construction of these differences have so infiltrated American society that it permeates life in the workplace, in families, in how we interact with strangers on the street, and how we base opinions of what we think of others through what we watch, read, and even the music we listen to. Prior to reading these sections, I honestly thought that being a White female really didn’t matter in today’s society. However, after reading these sections I began to question if being white afforded me opportunities and privilege others are not afforded. Moving from a primarily “White” town in the North, to an extremely racially mixed Southern society opened my eyes to racial, class, and gender stereotypes that had been ingrained into my thinking. For the last ten years, I have attempted to diligently weed out these stereotypes and view each person as an individual regardless of race, class or sex. However, through reading these sections I realized that I as an individual and we as a nation have a long way to go. I attend a church whose main goal other than preaching the gospel is that of racial reconciliation for a city that has been fragmented since the formation of it. Honest and open dialogue among members of the church occurs weekly and as a result stereotypes are shattered and new relationships are allowed to develop. My goal in life is to be like the apostle Paul who stated, “I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some” (New International Version).

Historical Accounts of Race, Class and Gender

Another theme discussed in Rothenberg’s (2007) book is the historical accounts of race, class and gender. Section VII presents texts that “traces the legal status of people of color and women since the first Europeans came to this land” (p. 520). Through reading the various historical documents in this section, the reader is able to chronologically view the historical opinions and rights afforded minority groups through hundreds of years. Presented in section VII of Rothenberg’s (2007) book are the rights afforded to American Indians, negroes and slaves, women’s suffrage, Chinese American’s, the Dred Scott case, the emancipation of slaves, the Thirteenth through Fifteenth amendments to the United States constitution, equal rights for men and women, Brown vs. the Board of Education, Roe vs. Wade, and Lesbian and Gay rights. After reading through the various legal and historical documents I realized how slow progress has been in the United States dealing with issues of race, class and sex. Issues with race, class, and sex have continuously been a central theme in the historical and legal context of the United States. In recent years women’s rights and homosexual rights have been central themes that have caused much heated debate, especially as it relates to the rights of the family and of unborn children. Minority and immigration rights also continue to be in the forefront of Government policy as we deal with issues of Mexican immigration, the war on terror, and the religious diversity of this nation. Public schools also are on the forefront of the American psyche as many inner city schools that serve a predominantly African American population remain inferior to their suburban “white” counterparts. Another issue that will continuously be drawing political attention in the future is the rights of the elderly and infirm as Medical costs continue to increase. As I read through the historical documents presented in section VII of Rothenberg’s (2007) book I was struck by how these documents continue to affect us today. In Memphis for example, although through the Supreme Court decision made in the case of Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, the segregation of white and colored children was deemed unequal in the public schools system, today schools remain segregated to an extent. City schools remain predominately “black”. While those who can afford to move to the suburbs with their children do, or send them to private schools. There are optional school programs in the inner city that allow for a more advanced curriculum, however, these “optional” programs further segregate even the inner city schools. The optional programs are difficult to get into, receive information about, and require families to spend a large amount of time standing in line to “sign” their children up. For those children whose parents do not receive the information, do not have the means or ability to stand in line for long periods of time, or whose children have received an inferior education to begin with and therefore do not meet the academic requirements it is difficult if not impossible to get in. It is quiet policies like these that are a continuous reminder of what Government needs to do to combat racial prejudice and unequal treatment. Although Government can change amendments and employ government policy it is up to us to keep our eyes open and bring to light ways in which people try to skirt around policies to further perpetuate prejudice and unequal treatment.

Suggestions for Moving beyond Racism, Sexism, and Classism

The final section of Rothenberg’s (2007) book discusses ways for society to change in reference to issues dealing with race, class, and sex. I found this section to be very integral to the culmination of this book. After reading so many selections that made the reader feel as if racial reconciliation, class and sexual equality seem impossible, the selections discussed in the final section of Rothenberg’s (2007) book offered hope. As Rothenberg (2007) states, “Eliminating these forms of oppression will involve changes at the personal, social, political, and economic levels. It will require us to think differently about ourselves and others and see the world through new lenses and using new categories. We will have to learn to pay close attention to our attitudes and behavior and ask what values and what kinds of relationships are being created and maintained, both consciously and unconsciously, by them” (p. 699). The reading in this section that I found to be most beneficial in how to overcome racial, sexual, and classist oppression was the selection entitled “Interrupting the cycle of oppression: The role of allies as agents of change” (p. 724-729). In this selection Andrea Ayvazian discusses ways in which individuals in society can work to “dismantle any form of oppression from which she or he receives the benefit” (p. 724). As individuals continuously dismantle the systems of oppression from which they benefit as a dominant person within a category, they pave the way for others to do the same. This takes courage, insight, and planning and an extreme amount of tenacity. I realized through reading this selection that I am in a position to be a change agent and positive role model. As a white middle class female, I can combat issues in the areas of race, sex and class. I can be a social change agent. I am in a unique position to advocate for change being in an interracial marriage and have the ability to be a role model for my children and the next generation. I am uniquely positioned to understand and love my African American brothers and sisters as well as combat prejudicial attitudes of my White brothers and sisters. This selection gave me great courage to see the unique position that God has placed me in to be ally for many.

In conclusion, Rothenberg’s (2007) book, Race, Class, and Gender in the United States, presents the reader with systemic view regarding the issues of race, class and gender. Through the readings in this book, the author presents the reader with the materials to judge for themselves and formulate their own opinion on the issues race, class, and gender and how it affects them in contemporary society. These readings have opened my eyes to the systems of oppression that still remain and how I can be an agent of change to dismantle unfair and unequal treatment.

Quantitative data analysis has been an inevitable part of social science research. Like any other discipline, the theories are taught to students to give them an idea and generalisation of social facts and books, journals and other sources are used for the same. However, at times these sources are not adequate and research needs to be done in order to gain a deeper knowledge. That is when quantitative data analysis comes into picture.

There have been questions raised on the need to study quantitative data analysis with the emergence of importance of qualititative data (Bryman 1988a), but the former’s importance has waned little. It helps that a larger proportion of empirical research that is conducted draws upon quantitative data.

The research design for any research study undertaken includes the method that needs to be applied for the purpose of collecting and analysing data.

Data collection can be done two ways- primary collection and secondary analysis of data. When the researcher collects data on their own for the sole purpose of the research that they are conducting, they are making use of primary data collection. The procedures used in these collection best suits the research problem at hand. The secondary analysis of data involves collecting data for a different research purpose but that is reused for the present research question.

Primary and Secondary Data

As explained before, data collected for the specific problem, primary data involves addition of new data to the existing store of knowledge surrounding the research area. When this material is used by other researchers, then this becomes secondary. Hox and Boeije (2005) maintain that the primary data can be used for:

Description of contemporary and historical attribute,
Comparative research or replication of original research,
Reanalysis for the purpose of asking new questions which were not addressed originally,
Research design and methodological advancement and lastly for 5. Teaching and learning

Secondary analysis utilises the existing data, collected for the purposes of a prior study, in order to pursue a research interest which is distinct from that of the original work (Heaton 2002).

Secondary data analysis is usually made of quantitative data where the information is made of researched objects whose characteristics have been coded in variables that can have a range of values. In fact, secondary analysis of quantitative data is common but the practice is not the same when it comes to qualitative data (Hinds, Vogel and Clarke-Steffen 1997).

Strengths and Weaknesses

Social science researchers undertaking research have a choice of opting to go for primary data- information that they need to collect by themselves or for secondary- searching for data that relates to the research problem in hand. There are distinct pros and cons of going for both. In this section, we will discuss what advantages or disadvantages the researcher faces when using any of these data collection methods.

One of the important advantages of going the way of primary data collection is that making use of the theoretical constructs, research design and the data collection strategy can be built with the research question in mind. This will ensure that the research study is coherent and the data collected is distinctly relevant to the problem at hand.

A disadvantage lies in the fact that primary data collection can be quite time consuming and expensive affair and considering the limitations of certain research study in terms of time and budget, primary data collection might not be a viable option for many researchers.

Another aspect of primary data collection is in its error inducing nature. Sampling errors made by inefficient field workers can skew up the research.

Some of the prominent data collection methods in primary data are: experiments, surveys like interviews, mail and web surveys. In the case of the experiment, the researcher is able to have a control on who participates in the research and the research situation being under the researcher’s control means that there is strong control of design and procedure permitting causal interpretation of the results. Thus the ability to have some control may be a distinct advantage for primary data, however this can turn into a disadvantage too as one might say that the researcher’s control has made the research ‘artificial’. In an experimental laboratory, variables are easily manageable and there is no place for the ‘circumstantial issues’ that dominate in everyday life. While conducting surveys, the researcher is able to gather both subjective as well as objective characteristics of the population. If interview questions are carefully designed, evaluated and tested, surveys are a very method to obtain first-hand valid responses from respondents.

Effectively, this leads us to understanding of the advantage of secondary data analysis. Secondary data is far easier to collect and is less expensive and the access to relevant information is faster. The disadvantage lies in the fact that secondary data was collected originally for a different purpose and therefore might not be optimal for the research problem that is being considered.

Heaton points out another argument favouring the use of secondary data analysis stating that it can be used to generate new knowledge, new hypotheses supporting an existing theory and it also reduces the burden that is placed on respondents (for primary data collection) by removing the need to further recruit subjects thus allowing a wider use of data from rare and inaccessible respondents.

Not all social research problems can allow the usage of secondary analysis. It has been determined that it is more convenient for certain researchers, namely students and in some cases by researchers re-using their own data rather than by independent analysts. (Szabo and Strang 1997).

In their own right secondary data analysis is an effective tool in teaching as it helps in introducing students to a discipline and provides a supplement to the process of teaching (Sobal 1982).

But the cons behind using the same are numerous. The researcher will need to locate the source of data that is more relevant to the study and this can be time consuming as pointed out earlier. The researcher should also be able to retrieve the data, which at times can be difficult. Also, the data should be able to meet the quality requirements of the present research. Besides, the reliability of the secondary data is also a major function of the organisation that gathers, organises and publishes the data.

Another crippling factor that arises in the use of secondary analysis is that it differs from systematic reviews and the meta-analyses of qualitative studies that aim towards compiling and assessing the evidence relating to a common research concern or area of practice (Popay, Rogers and Williams 1998).

An issue that doesn’t come in forefront when discussing secondary analysis is the principle of ethics behind using it. In using sensitive data, the researcher cannot assume informed consent. A professional judgement needs to be made about the usage of the secondary data and whether that violates any contract between the researchers and the original researcher (Hinds, Vogel and Clarke-Steffen 1997).

Conclusion

In conclusion, one may say that there are several advantages and disadvantages of secondary data analysis to collection of one’s own primary data, and its usage is best suited to some research issues. But secondary data analysis is a valuable asset as they can act as a model for the collection of primary data. Suffice it to say that there might not be a need to choose between primary data and secondary data analysis at all, as the researcher can easily incorporate both in their research to gain a degree of balance between their strengths and weaknesses. What is most important is that both primary as well as secondary data should be accurate, reliable, appropriate, valid, precise and timely.

References:
Bryman, A. 1988), Quantity and Quality in Social Research, London: Routledge
Heaton, L; Secondary analysis of qualitative data, 2003, in R. Miller and J. Brewer (eds.) The A-Z of Social Research, Sage, pp 285-288
Hinds, P.S., Vogel, R.J., Clarke-Steffen, L. (1997) ‘The possibilities and pitfalls of doing a secondary analysis of a qualitative data set’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 7(3): 408-24.
Hox, J.J. and Boeije, H.R. (2005). Data collection, primary versus secondary. in K. Kempf-Leonard (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Social Measurement, pp. 593-599
Popay, J., Rogers, A., Williams, G. (1998) ‘Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research’, Qualitative Health Research, vol. 8 (3): pp. 329-40
Sobal, J. 1982, The Role of Secondary Data Analysis in Teaching the Social Sciences, Library Trends, vol. 30, n3, p479-88.
Szabo, V. and Strang, V.R. (1997) ‘Secondary analysis of qualitative data’, Advances in Nursing Science, vol. 20(2): 66-74.

Although sociologists have debated the purpose and function of educational institutions, most agree that access to educational opportunities has a profound effect on individual life chances and attainment. We’ll consider how specific education policies and practices -like school choice, curriculum differentiation, school finance, and school assignment – shape the range of educational opportunities afforded students. Because issues of equity have moved to the forefront of education policies during the past fifty years, we’ll discuss the consequences of these policies and practices for students from different social backgrounds – primary among these differences are differences by social class, race/ethnicity, and gender.

During the next three weeks we’ll consider different explanations for the existence of schools and mass education in modern societies. A central question is whether or not schools function to promote social mobility and economic well-being or whether or not schools function to reproduce social inequalities and secure valued resources for individuals from privileged social backgrounds.

An alternative, though not necessarily conflicting proposition, is that educational institutions promote social mobility, achievement, and economic growth in modern societies. The relationship between education and status attainment (e.g., earnings or occupational prestige) has often been provided as evidence that a country has an open and fluid society, one which provides individual opportunities for social advancement through the acquisition of technical skills and knowledge. This week we’ll examine the status attainment paradigm and some research that seeks to test it

many sociologists point to the fact that educational attainment is also related to an individual’s family background (i.e., one’s socioeconomic status). These sociologists see educational institutions not as promoting social equality but as promoting social inequalities.

Conflict theory sees the purpose of education as maintaining social inequality and preserving the power of those who dominate society. Conflict theorists examine the same functions of education as functionalists. Functionalists see education as a beneficial contribution to an ordered society; however, conflict theorists see the educational system as perpetuating the status quo by dulling the lower classes into being obedient workers.

Both functionalists and conflict theorists agree that the educational system practices sorting, but they disagree about how it enacts that sorting. Functionalists claim that schools sort based upon merit; conflict theorists argue that schools sort along distinct class and ethnic lines. According to conflict theorists, schools train those in the working classes to accept their position as a lower-class member of society. Conflict theorists call this role of education the “hidden curriculum.”

Marx

The political system, the legal system, the family, the press, the education system were all rooted, in the final analysis, to the class nature of society, which in turn was a reflection of the economic base. Marx maintained that the economic base or infrastructure generated or had built upon it a superstructure that kept it functioning. The education system, as part of the superstructure, therefore, was a reflection of the economic base and served to reproduce it. This did not mean that education and teaching was a sinister plot by the ruling class to ensure that it kept its privileges and its domination over the rest of the population. There were no conspirators hatching devious schemes. It simply meant that the institutions of society, like education, were reflections of the world created by human activity and that ideas arose from and reflected the material conditions and circumstances in which they were generated.

Durkheim

Durkheim on Education:

Believed that education served many functions:

1) To reinforce social solidarity

Pledging allegiance: makes individuals feel part of a group and therefore less likely to break rules.

2) To maintain social roles

School is a society in miniature: it has a similar hierarchy, rules, expectations to the “outside world,” and trains people to fulfill roles.

3) To maintain division of labor

School sorts students into skill groups, encouraging students to take up employment in fields best suited to their abilities.

Durkheim said that one of the ways to maintain the division of labor, schools should sort students into skill groups, encouraging students to take up employment in fields best suited to their abilities.

Emile Durkheim provided one of the initial explanations for the emergence of mass education in modern societies – nation building and social control. Durkheim believed that the role of educational institutions in modern societies was to replace, or at least supplement, the role that religious institutions and families played in traditional societies – namely, socializing young people into a common culture and the moral foundations of collective life. Subsequent sociologists expanded these ideas to examine the role of educational institutions in the development of nation-states and the transmission of cultural values and social roles.

dynamics of education revolve and are implicated in the unequal

distribution of resources in society, Marxian and Weberian theories)

Weber

Consequences of class position

Different consumption of social goods is the most visible consequence of class. In modern societies, it manifests as income inequality, though in subsistence societies it manifested as malnutrition and periodic starvation. Although class status is not a causal factor for income, there is consistent data that show those in higher classes have higher incomes than those in lower classes. This inequality still persists when controlling for occupation. The conditions at work vary greatly depending on class. Those in the upper-middle class and middle class enjoy greater freedoms in their occupations. They generally are more respected, enjoy more diversity, and are able to exhibit some authority. Those in lower classes tend to feel more alienated and have lower work satisfaction overall. The physical conditions of the workplace differ greatly between classes. While middle-class workers may “suffer alienating conditions” or “lack of job satisfaction”, blue-collar workers suffer alienating, often routine, work with obvious physical health hazards, injury, and even death.

In the more social sphere, class has direct consequences on lifestyle. Lifestyle includes tastes, preferences, and a general style of living. These lifestyles could quite possibly affect educational attainment, and therefore status attainment. Class lifestyle also affects how children are raised. For example, a working-class person is more likely to raise their child to be working class and middle-class children are more likely to be raised to be middle-class. This perpetuates the idea of class for future generations.

Max Weber agrees with the fundamental ideas of Marx about the economy causing class conflict, but claims that class conflict can also stem from prestige and power [6]. Weber argues that classes come from the different property locations. Different locations can largely affect one’s class by their education and the people they associate with [6]. He also states that prestige results in different status groupings. This prestige is based upon the social status of one’s parents. Prestige is an attributed value and many times cannot be changed. Weber states that power differences led to the formation of political parties [6]. Weber disagrees with Marx about the formation of classes. While Marx believes that groups are similar due to their economic status, Weber argues that classes are largely formed by social status [6]. Weber does not believe that communities are formed by economic standing, but by similar social prestige [6]. Weber does recognize that there is a relationship between social status, social prestige and classes [6].

The functionalist perspective suggests that everyone benefits from the functions carried out by the education system. Conflict theories such as the Marxist approach argue that this is not the case, rather education, is seen as the apparatus that legitimizes and reproduces society’s inequalities and divisions. The Marxist approach is relevant because it is interpreted as helping to legitimize class divisions because they promote the idea that the middle class receive education while the lower-classes/working receive training.

Emile Durkheim is known as functionalist, states that everything serves a function in society and his main concern to discover what that function was. On the other hand Karl Marx, a conflict theorist stresses that society is a complex system characterized by inequality and conflict that generate social change. Both Durkheim and Marx were concerned with the characteristics of groups and structures rather than with individuals.

The functionalist perspective in society is a view of society that focuses on the way various parts of society have functions, or possible effects that maintain the stability of the whole. Durkheim developed the idea of society as an integrated system of interrelated parts. He wanted to establish how the various parts of society contribute to the maintenance of the whole. He also focused on how various elements of social structure function to maintain social order and equilibrium. Durkheim stressed that culture is the product of a community and not of single individuals. He argued that the ultimate reality of human life is sociological and not psychological. The sociological reality, which Durkheim called the collective conscience, exists beyond the…

Conflict theories draw attention to power differentials, such as class conflict, and generally contrast historically dominant ideologies.

According to Conflict Theory, society is:

A struggle for dominance among competing social groups (classes, genders, races, religions, etc.). When conflict theorists look at society, they see the social domination of subordinate groups through the power, authority, and coercion of dominant groups. In the conflict view, the most powerful members of dominant groups create the rules for success and opportunity in society, often denying subordinate groups such success and opportunities; this ensures that the powerful continue to monopolize power, privilege, and authority. You should note that most conflict theorists oppose this sort of coercion and favor a more equal social order. Some support a complete socioeconomic revolution to socialism (Marx), while others are more reformist, or perhaps do not see all social inequalities stemming from the capitalist system (they believe we could solve racial, gender, and class inequality without turning to socialism). However, many conflict theorists focus on capitalism as the source of social inequalities.

The primary cause of social problems, according to the conflict perspective, is the exploitation and oppression of subordinate groups by dominants. Conflict theorists generally view oppression and inequality as wrong, whereas Structural-Functionalists may see it as necessary for the smooth running and integration of society. Structural-Functionalism and Conflict Theory therefore have different VALUE-ORIENTATIONS but can lead to similar insights about inequality (e.g., they both believe that stereotypes and discrimination benefit dominant groups, but conflict theorists say this should end and most structural-functionalists believe it makes perfect sense that subordinates should be discriminated against, since it serves positive social ends). Conflict theory sees social change as rapid, continuous, and inevitable as groups seek to replace each other in the social hierarchy.

– In contrast to Structural-Functionalists, who argue that the most talented individuals occupy the highest positions, conflict theorists argue that dominant groups monopolize positions of power, maintaining power from generation to generation and keeping subordinate groups out. Also in contrast to Structural-Functionalists, who argue that the most important positions in society are the best rewarded, conflict theorists argue that dominant groups get inordinate power to define which positions are socially rewarded. Highly-paid positions are not necessarily most important for society, they argue, but keep power in the hands of the privileged and powerful.

Education

McLeod’s “Ain’t No Makin’ It” is a good example of conflict theory as applied to education. He argues that teachers treat lower-class kids like less competent students, placing them in lower “tracks” because they have generally had fewer opportunities to develop language, critical thinking, and social skills prior to entering school than middle and upper class kids. When placed in lower tracks, lower-class kids are trained for blue-collar jobs by an emphasis on obedience and following rules rather than autonomy, higher-order thinking, and self-expression. They point out that while private schools are expensive and generally reserved for the upper classes, public schools, especially those that serve the poor, are underfunded, understaffed, and growing worse. Schools are also powerful agents of socialization that can be used as tools for one group to exert power over others – for example, by demanding that all students learn English, schools are ensuring that English-speakers dominate students from non-English speaking backgrounds. Many conflict theorists argue, however, that schools can do little to reduce inequality without broader changes in society (e.g. creating a broader base of high-paying jobs or equalizing disparities in the tax base of communities).

Every society has specialized individuals who fulfill certain positions that require extended education.

Functionalists take the view that society must be divided into separate groups, each of which performs a task that is necessary to the survival of society as a whole – the organic whole. Societies function well when people accept internally, either consciously or unconsciously, the need to contribute to the organic functioning of the whole of society. People agree voluntarily to submerge part of their individual identity in favour of the survival of all. They do this because they recognise that there is no simple alternative to society. They would accuse Marxists of “utopianism” – that is, dreaming up a “perfect”, but wholly unrealistic and unrealisable society based on a dream world. When people accept their role in society they develop a form of social conscience, which Durkheim labels the “conscience collective”. Functionalists tend to look to the sociologist Emile Durkheim as the founder of their point of view. This is not entirely true. Modern functionalists, like Talcott Parsons, seek to defend capitalism, but Durkheim’s vision of the organic society of the future was one in which there would be no inheritance of capital, so people would be assigned their functional role on the basis of merit alone. Modern capitalist societies are not meritocracies in this sense. Different individuals find different roles in society, but the opportunities of individuals are considerably affected by their class situation. Although Durkheim is not exactly a defender of capitalism, his functionalism, which tells us that every social grouping is a functional part of the whole of society, tends to favour a defence of capitalism. Capitalists see the educational system as fair, and as preparing individuals for their roles in adult society according to their abilities. Talcott Parsons sees the school classroom as a microcosm of society. It is a bridge between the family and wider society. In wider society status is achieved. Education socialises young people for adult roles. According to Talcott Parson’s Functionalism individuals interact with each other through the medium of social structures. They accept common standards of evaluation, which are moral standards or ‘norms’. Sociological processes maintain these structures, and ensure stability through adherence to the norms. This is called a ‘structuralist-functionalist’ approach to social systems analysis. Parsons analyses the functions of society into: 1. Adaptation – the provision of physical necessities – the economic system; 2. Goal attainment – the establishment of the goals of society as a whole – the political system; 3. Pattern maintenance and tension management – serves to motivate individuals and resolve conflicts – kinship, family & marriage; 4. Integration – socialisation of individuals to accept the norms and control them if they don’t – schools, churches, media, police and judicial system. Therefore, Parsons sees education as serving a part in the function of integration. Through education individuals are socialised to conform. Education also supports the economic “imperative” of society by: 1. Inculcating certain technical skills and requirements; 2. Separating out potential workers for different points of entry to the labour market. Regarding the integration “imperative” schooling specifically causes children to internalise social values and norms at a level which the family alone cannot achieve. In America elementary school education teaches American youth the value of fair competition. “It includes, above all, recognition that it is fair to give differential rewards for different levels of achievement, so long as there has been fair access to opportunity..” Functionalists maintain that there is a high degree of equality of opportunity within the education system Functionalism stresses the link between education and the economy. A malfunctioning educational system would be one in which individuals are not assigned the most appropriate role, and will hence lead to inefficiency. This could be taken as an argument against elitism in education and in favour of a comprehensive system. Davies and Moore follow Parsons claiming that “Education is the proving ground for ability and hence the selective agency for placing people in different statuses according to their capacities.” Thus modern functionalists tend to assume that the education system is a meritocracy. Functionalists believe that the demands of industrial society for a skilled workforce are met by the educational system. In criticism of functionalism: 1.Functionalism does not appear to offer a satisfactory account of conflict within educational systems. The goals and purposes of education are not generally agreed by professionals and employees within it. 2. It fails to deal adequately with the content of the curriculum and teacher-pupil interaction in the classroom. 3. It treats individuals as if they were the “puppets” of society. “Nothing more than the product of the societal norms and values which they internalise through their experiences of socialisation in the home, school, workplace etc.” 4. Functionalists, especially of the Talcott Parsons type, tend to idealise existing society and ignore facts that a critical of their own views. Seeking to argue that society is a meritocracy based on equality of opportunity, functionalists tend to be wilfully blind to the very real differences of educational experience between members of different classes. They seek to paint a rosy picture in which the functions of individuals in society are all assigned to them by the educational system, rather than by class.

Education is an important aspect of the work of society and it will raise the countryside issues and promote knowledge and understanding of rural communities. One of the education essential tasks is to enable people to understand themselves. Students must be equipped with knowledge and skills which are needed to participate effectively as member of society and contribute towards the development of shared values and common identity. Education has a vital role to play in assisting students to understand their cultural identity. Education acts as the distribution mechanism of the cultural values such as it more layered the society and participate in society that carries the culture.

Education and society provides a forum where teachers and scholars all over the world are able to evaluate problems in education and society from a balanced and comparative social and economic perspective. Education is an important aspect of the work of society and it will raise the countryside issues and promote knowledge and understanding of rural communities. One of the education essential tasks is to enable people to understand themselves. Students must be equipped with knowledge and skills which are needed to participate effectively as member of society and contribute towards the development of shared values and common identity.

Education has a vital role to play in assisting students to understand their cultural identity. Education acts as the distribution mechanism of the cultural values such as it more layered the society and participate in society that carries the culture. In our culture today, there is a great emphasis on higher education. In a society, more educated you are, better off you are. Every society has specialized individuals that require extended education to fulfill certain main positions. These persons are normally known as professors, priests, doctors, mechanics or artists. Education has been a higher part of every culture on earth and education is a systemic project. Whole society should care for and support the education patriotism, cause and socialism among the young people.

Everyone must do work hard to cultivate moral conduct. Education mainly begins at home; one does not acquire knowledge from a teacher, one can learn and get knowledge from a parent or a family member. In almost all societies, receiving education and attending school is very necessary is one wants to achieve success. Education is the key to move in the world, seek better jobs and ultimately succeed in life. Schools play a vital role in preparing our children and young people for effective participation and responsible citizenship in society. The development of education and educational opportunities is built on creativity tempered by knowledge and wisdom gain through the experience of learning.

Investment in human capital, life long learning and quality education help in the development of society. Teachers are the most important factors for an innovative society because teachers’ knowledge and skills not only enhance the quality and efficiency of education, but also improve the prerequisites of research and innovation. Many members of our society are not provided with a safe and secure environment in which children can develop, child abuse, violence against women and interpersonal violence cause a cancer on our society. Society play a key role in the realization of life long learning. The improvement of social education facilities such as libraries and the learning opportunities are implemented by the local governments. Students today are exposed to loads of technology and information at everywhere.

London is the capital of England and is one of the largest cities of the world as well of the United Kingdom. The city has a huge population of 8,174,100, making it the most populous municipality in the European Union. All these people have to move in order to lead their life and a huge number of the population take the private transport for travelling. Although there are many people who travel on their private vehicles, an appreciable number of people take the public transport. London being one of the most modern cities of the world also offers many options to its citizens for travelling. There are underground train services, London Buses, Tram link, the Docklands Light Railway, over ground, air transports and other options. A report suggests that annually in London, there are a staggering 2 billion of bus journeys, 1 billion of underground journeys and 800 million journeys on National Rail networks.

Body

All the people of London travel in the public transports throughout the day. People travel, go to their work, students go to schools by these public transports. A survey was made on the public transport in London by taking opinions from the people of London. The survey was done with people of different ages. The people were asked different questions and their answers were studied. The question asked comprised of two types. One category had one word answers and the other had elaborate options. However, all the questions were multiple choice questions. We gathered a clear idea about the public transport in London from the survey.

The first ten questions were one word answers. The survey takers just ticked on any one of the option between yes and no. We found different opinions from different people. People’s responses also differed with their ages and economic capacities. The first ten questions are given in the table below, along with their answers. The answers are given in percentage after making a calculation from the responses and opinions of the people.

Serial

Question

Answer in Percentage

01

Do you travel in Public transport?

60%

02

Do you have a private transport?

50%

03

Are you a regular traveller?

50%

04

Do you have any income?

70%

05

Do you go to work by public transport?

90%

06

Is Public Transports of London comfortable?

60%

07

Is it cheaper than private transports?

100%

08

Do you find the Public Transports crowd?

80%

09

Do other members of your family travel in public transports?

60%

10

Are you happy with the Public Transports of London?

70%

Table No. 01

The outcome of the survey helps to draw a picture of the Public transport of London. The study shows that more than half of the people of London avail public transport. Here we see the figure stands 60%. In addition to that it is seen that a good number of people do not have a private vehicle. Now, the next question asked to the survey takers was if they were regular travellers. 50% of them agreed that they were regular passengers. It meant that they were regular customers and that they depended of public transport.

People travel and make journeys for various purposes. The study shows that most of the people went to work in public transport. So, public transport is a very essential medium for going to the work place. It is at the same time a very prominent option for the employees. However, one thing cannot be denied at all. During rush hours and even at some other time of the day, there are huge crowd in these transports. This problem does not happen at all time but mostly during rush hours. The problem is not because there is less number of vehicles but that there are more people at the same time. The scenery is common while people start for office and then again when they return. For this reason 80% of the people said that public transports were filled with crowd.

The survey went to details about the topic and about the feeling of the people. The questions were done for the other family members of the people. The individuals were asked if other members of their families used public transports as a mean of travelling. A good number of 60% of the people informed that other members of their family also travelled on these transports. This means that the families that use public transport use the maximum use of it. The last question that was asked to the survey takers was their feeling about the transport systems. It was asked if they were happy with the public transport of London. A total of 70 percent of the people said they were happy with the situation. This conveys a very positive feeling about the Public Transport of London. It also depicts that the communication system of the city is very good, developed and advanced. At the same time it is also very public friendly.

The second phase of the survey was the open questions. After getting a picture of the public transport of London the purpose was to go deeper. A total of 5 open questions were asked to get a more elaborate picture. The questions were asked to know about the different types of public transports that the people used.

The first of the open question was about the age of the people. The people were asked to disclose their age so that it could be calculated that which age of people took he public transport more.

The chart below shows the age wise transporters.

Chart No. 01

The chart clearly shows that the most of the people taking public transports are from the age of 15-30. The next group of people who take this transport are the people of aging between 30 and 45 years. Almost no people aging below 15 take the public transport and there are a few people aging 45 to 60 years old take the transports. People aging above 60 do use public transport but they are very few. It means the children are not independent, they depend on their parents. So, they normally do not travel on public transports. The do not usually travel much. If they even do, they are accompanied by their parents. The old people do less travelling, so their percent is also low. The people, who are young aging between 15 to 45 years, are the ones who take the public transport most. It is because they go to work, attain classes, and do all other travelling by the public transports.

The next question that was asked to the people was their occupation. It was really needed to know which class or group of people used the public transport most. The chart below reflects the travelling of different people.

Chart No. 02

The chart clearly shows which category of the people takes the public transport most. It shows that the working people use the maximum utilization. Next are the students and then are the people looking for work. People go to their work places with the public transports. The students also take this for going to their educational institutions. People who are looking for work are also taking the help of the public transport. The later questions elaborate why these people use this means.

The third question that was asked to the people was that which public transports they found more comfortable.

London is a city of many dwellers and there are also many options of public transports. The city firstly like all others have public buses. The city has a long and connected underground rail line. It is one of the oldest in the world but much advanced. The railway changed and advanced to the highest extends with the introduction of all the modern technologies. Normal trains are also available added with trumps. The chart below shows the percentage of the different public transports taken by the people.

Chart No. 03

The chart clearly shows that most of the people of London take the underground. That means the underground rail transport holds the maximum passengers. It alone carries about 50 percent of the public. The next are the buses and then the trump. The airways is least taken by the people. Air is not so popular because it is expensive.

The next question was asked which public transport was lower in cost. The options were the same. The chart below shows the result.

Chart No. 04

The data shows that the underground train is the cheapest. That is one of the reasons why people take this transport. The percentage is 70 percent. The figure next to it is the bus which is about 25 percent.

The last question that was asked to the people was that which transport saved more time. The chart shows the situation below.

Chart No. 05

The answer to the question that which transport saves time is different from all the others. Although very few of the people took the air lines, most of them agreed that airn transport saved the time most. The percent was 70%. The reason again why it was not 100% is because of the distance. Shorter distance could easily be travelled by train and then by buses.

Conclusion

All the data and the discussions above show a clear picture of the transport system of London. It shows that most of the people of London do take the Public Transport. The study finds that the underground railway dominates among the public transports. London has a very well organized public transport and it is also very advanced in technology. The people living in London are also comfortable with their Public Transport.

Poverty in the Caribbean has been an irritating issue for as long as I can remember. It is an issue that has caused many governments in the Caribbean and world-wide, grief and even resulted in their loss at the polls or demise. In truth it is a very hard issue to overcome or rectify due to its magnitude of causes both internal and external to the particular country. To obtain an understanding of the “psychology of poverty” and its cause and effect “in the Caribbean”; one has to examine the following.

Psychology, what is it? Simply put (according to the book “UNDERSTANDING Psychology”, 1992, pg.7, 9.) it “is the study of human behaviour and mental processes. It covers every thing that people think, feel and do, and further seeks to describe, explain, predict and control behaviour.”

Poverty; according to the “The Concise Oxford Dictionary’ means indigence, want, scarcity, inferiority and poorness. However, I prefer to agree with Professor Bourne’s opinion stated in his paper entitled “Poverty and its Alleviation in the Caribbean 2005”; in that poverty is not just defined as those individuals who live off less than one dollar per day ($1.00/day)(as described as the Millennium Development Goal for poverty reduction’s target 2000). But that it is a “pronounced deprivation in wellbeing” “that is to be in poverty or to be poor is to be hungry, lack shelter, clothing, to be sick and lack health care to be illiterate and not schooled and further relating to the work to Amartya Sen, that states that, the state of being poor extends beyond income levels, but is also affected by ‘unfreedoms’ which individuals are subjected to in terms of tyranny or bad treatment by the state and exclusion from participating in decisions and also being vulnerable to economic and natural hazards”

POVERTY IN THE CARIBBEAN

When one looks at the islands of the Caribbean, in terms of their governmental and economic structure, levels of education, health care and income levels; they are all different. With this in mind the term ‘poor’ might fit into different categories. Countries such as the Bahamas and the U S Virgin Island with their close affiliation to the U.S. and its ‘almighty dollar’ might have a higher standard of living and ‘poor’ in their country might mean middle class in another. To further emphasize their differences; I quote from Professor Bourne’s paper (according to the Surveys of Living Conditions conducted between 1996 and 2002), that “countries such as Haiti and Suriname whose poverty line was 65% and 63% were on the high end of the poverty spectrum, while Belize, Dominica and St Kitts were between 30-40% and Anguilla, St Lucia, Trinidad and Tobago and Turks and Caicos Island were between 20-29%, while Barbados had 14% and Jamaica had 20%;” concluding that at that point in time Barbados had the lowest poverty level in the Caribbean.

CAUSES OF POVERTY

In discussing this issue, due to my being Jamaican by birth and living here all my life; (with few exceptions of travel) and my familiarity with the intricacies of the country and the discovery that there are varied levels of poverty or being poor that exist in this little island . I have chosen to use Jamaica as my example and direct most of my discussion using this island; for I believe that Jamaica is indeed the melting pot of the Caribbean. If one looks widely one will be able to find a native of every Caribbean island living here; just look at our Psychology class! In this class of 21 students, we have Nigerians, (Africa) Guyanese, (South America) and Jamaicans. Quite a mixture indeed!

The causes of poverty in my opinion are varied and I would like to start with that of:

Slavery, (defined as the condition of a slave, which further means to be a helpless victim to or of some dominating influence; according to “The Oxford Concise Dictionary”) is still very operative in our Jamaican society and that of the Caribbean today. Although we boast of having one of the greatest Reggae singers of all time; we have still not fully understood the meaning of Bob Marley’s song which states “EMANCIPATE YOUR SELF FROM MENTAL SLAVERY” In my opinion we as a Caribbean people although we have been made free for a number of years and in Jamaica it has been from 1838; over one hundred and seventy one years ago. Although physically we have been freed, we still possess a type of mentality that causes us to want ‘hand-outs’, and the need to be ‘taken care of’ still exist.(just like when the slaves were on the plantation and looked to their slave masters for their total existence). The word independence or the need to be independent has still not been cemented in our minds; in order to create a change in behaviour that causes us to obtain a sense of determination that says that ‘I will obtain or achieve any thing I put my mind, heart and abilities to.( in respect to the elements of time and opportunities’)

Unemployment and low income levels. I must agree with professor Bourne in his paper mentioned above that the governments of the Caribbean including Jamaica; have not been able to create an adequate amount of jobs for its people; as he states that unemployment is “between 7 and 20%” which is relatively high . Incidentally in Jamaica this has given rise to the hustler mentality. One has but to go to Down-Town Kingston, especially on a market day, that is on a Saturday and sees the amount of individuals who hustle for a living day by day. Hustling ranges from the buying and selling of legitimate goods, to dealing in drugs such as ganja, to that of the gambling of the now famous ‘cash-pot’ which believe it or not puts food on many a table daily. As for low income levels, for example, one has but to look at the difference in pay of Registered Nurses in Barbados whose basic pay is approximately $77,0000 per month compared to the same category of nurses in Jamaica who earn $48,000 per month. This difference one might agree would affect the individual’s ability to save for ‘a rainy day’, or to make investments, to maintain an acceptable standard of living or to even further one’s self academically. Also the inequality of pay scales within a given country can affect its peoples’ poverty levels. Take for instance in Jamaica at this time of world wide financial depression when Nurses and other workers are negotiating for a better pay scale and who are just able to scoop out a meager existence from their meager salaries only to be informed of individuals earning $1.9 million per month for negotiating services. Look at the gross difference!

Volatility of our economy and susceptibility to Natural disasters. I must concur with professor Bourne, when he states that “the Caribbean economy is volatile and this volatility is a contributory factor to poverty”. He further sates that “economic volatility arises from several sources, all of which are not necessarily operative at the same time. The sources include economic dislocation caused by major adverse changes in international markets for Caribbean exports of goods and services”. One has only to look at the issue of the decline in the export our bananas where the European and U.S. markets have now started to import ‘Chiquita’ bananas instead of bananas from the Caribbean. This has impacted negatively on our economies (especially Dominica) in terms of job losses and loss of investments by the governing bodies of these countries involved. Professor Bourne also states that we are also affected by the “acute fiscal difficulties arising from changes in flows of foreign and international debt”. In Jamaica one has only to remember the harsh demands that the International Monetary Fund made on us in the past such as gross job cuts and can only pray that the new intended demands may not be as harsh. (One can only Hope!) As for Natural Disasters, we are quite susceptible in that we are at the mercy of hurricanes and floods. I remember Gilbert as if it was yesterday; when the roof of my house was lost. If it were not for the quick actions of the government of the day in issuing free zinc of which I was a grateful recipient. I would have remained ‘roof-less’ until December of that year when the Insurance representative got around to evaluating the damages and ended up issuing a third of the estimated cost of repairs because he thought that it wasn’t that great a damage! To think, I had Insurance! What about those who could not afford insurance because their low income levels? To further examine these hazards’ effects, just look at what hurricane ‘Ivan’ did to Grenada; Ivan practically flattened Grenada in a few hours and destroyed infrastructures that took years to develop. It literally changed Grenada’s means of existence for long time.

Lack of proper Health Care and Educational facilities. “Poor” people in the Caribbean may be working but might still remain poor. This causes them to be unable to access proper heath care which might result in a rise in chronic diseases such as diabetes and hypertension and even psychotic illnesses such as depression. In Jamaica there is now free health care, but just how effective it has been is another matter. Take for instance my aunt of 82 years, she has a cataract in her eye and needs for it to be repaired surgically. She went to the Kingston Public Hospital to in October 2009, of this year where she got an appointment to return in December, 2009; where another appointment will be given for her to return some time in 2010! I could not believe it when I was told. Can you imagine, by the time December comes, much less 2010 my aunt may be home with the Almighty God! (dead) As for the ability of poor to access education; it can be taxing, with the ever rising cost of school fees, books and uniforms the low income earners and even those of middle income can just barely get by. In Jamaica there is the PATH programme which is of some help to the poor in that it assists with school fees, uniforms etc.; thus taking off some of the financial strain from the parents.

EFFECTS OF PROVERTY

Based on the definition given above that states that being poor or living poverty does not only rely on low income or the lack there of , but also on the lack of proper health care ,proper infrastructure( such as roads, water), educational facilities, tyranny etc. In my opinion, when one looks at the lack or unavailability of these facets in the rural communities of the islands of the Caribbean, one realizes that people who think that the urban communities are a better place will want to migrate to these areas. This can be seen in my country Jamaica where the Government offices, best hospitals and schools are located in the two main urban cities that is Kingston and Montego Bay. This migration often result in over-crowding, further leading to a rise in ‘squatter settlements’ which leads to an increase of tin the spread of disease; thus putting a further strain on the health care system. This type of migration not only happens with in a country, but can also be seen when the Haitians defy dead at sea to come to Jamaica seeking ‘a better life’; thus putting further strain of the Jamaican economy. Although it’s not the only reason for the rise in crime and drug abuse this is still a contributing factor, as can be seen in the rise in the crime rate in these two cities. There is also a brain drain from the rural areas to the urban areas of a particular country and even between countries of the Caribbean and to countries such as the U.S. and Europe in order to obtain a better income, thus enhancing or providing for a perceived improved way of life. This results in the loss of valuable resources that in my opinion is not easily replaced, and if it is replaced costs these countries practically an ‘arm and a leg’ to do so.

One can also examine the effects of the lack of availability of proper health care; and in this case especially to the elderly, who either have very low income gained from their meager pensions or none at all. This makes them vulnerable and easier to succumb to diseases. For the remainder of the population, ill health (mental and physical) often results in low production levels and decreases the internal drive or motivation to succeed, thus increasing the levels of poverty.

The negative effects of international markets on the economies of the Caribbean can be devastating. As was mentioned above; as in Jamaica our dollar is linked strongly to that of the U.S. and if the U.S. dollar falls , our dollar falls; resulting in tremendous losses on the stock market among other investment entities, further resulting in loss of jobs and the demise of companies especially the small businesses. Also if these international countries ‘taste’ change as was also mentioned above, in terms of the bananas they consume; then there goes the banana industries in a down-ward spiral in these countries also.

The inability of our countries to protect ourselves from natural disasters results in a negative effect in that these disasters often destroy agriculture, (which is the main stay of most of these Caribbean islands) infrastructure,(roads, water mains, gullies, electricity) government buildings and private homes. They indeed destroy what it has taken years of hard work, sacrifice, and determination to build. This puts a strain on economies emotionally, physically, and financially to rebuild every time such an occurrence takes place.

ALLEVIATION OF PROVERTY

I believe that in the Caribbean, in the same way that each island is unique in nature, so do the individual people and governments of each island have to identify unique ways in solving this problem of poverty. As seen in the report on the “Cost of Poverty in the Caribbean” by The International Institute for Social Political and Economic Change(IISPEC) and co-sponsored by UNESCO. (March 17-19, 2008). Grenada whose poverty level was 32% in 1998 has implemented Safety Net Programme – allocation of funds, and established Food Basket programmes, and St. Lucia has implemented a Poverty Reduction Fund. I also agree with their list of initiative programmes that have been mentioned, such as. Focus on education & training

– Provide scholarships to encourage more research, Make CDB/CTCS more national in focus

De-politicization of poverty reduction/eradication programmes, Needs national consensus

However I will endeavor to add a few other suggestions to both Jamaica and other islands of the Caribbean, Focus on education & training, Provide scholarships to encourage more research

– Make Caribbean Development Banks a national focus, De-politicization of poverty reduction/eradication programmes, i.e. to take political agendas out of programmes designed to assist the poor and the need for a national census in order to find out the people’s opinion on the matters brought forward to solve the problem of poverty.

In Jamaica, at this time the governing bodies have implemented the Path Programme, which assists needy (poor) people in a financial way to be able to send their children to school to obtain an education, by way of cash payments.

There is also the provision of ‘free’ health care. In my opinion it is a good thought but I do not think that it can be properly maintained especially in this time of financial depression. If one will take the time to examine the following scenario, one might agree with me on point. Take a healthy young man who doesn’t feel that he should work because he’s comfortable ‘hustling’ probably via ‘cash-pot’. He gets a girl pregnant and she gets totally free health care to have this child; the child goes home, grows , starts going to school and gets on the Path programme, where society sends this child to school free of cost. One could argue that this is a way of reducing the levels of both maternal and infant deaths by providing free health care; or that by assisting the child to go to school might reduce the probability that this child being uneducated might be a part of our crime problem in the future. Baring all this in mind I might agree; but I still contend that this might help to promote ‘a freeness mentality’ that is so prevalent in our society; which we need to stomp out of our society, in order for us to improve our way of thinking and thus lift ourselves from poverty. To think even in the large industrial countries health care is not totally free, some one must pay for it! I prefer that my hard earn tax dollars be used to pay for free health care to be available to the elderly, the very young (12 years and under), the destitute, and the mentally and physically challenged; the most vulnerable in our society.

I think safety nets can be put in place where a disaster fund is implemented to provide for hurricane and flood victims. Also in terms of providing employment I think the provisions of entities such as the HEART ACADEMY and ‘free primary education’ are a GOD sent to poor people. However I think that the provision of more scholarships should be made to assist with further tertiary education.

In terms of enhancing employment I think that the apprenticeship programme should be reimplementation where one can learn while they work and earn. We could also try to re-educate our people in terms of self reliance, to think that the soil is good in order to attract an increased interest in agriculture and along with this to allocate lands to these individuals in order for them to grow and produce more thus providing more jobs.

SUMMARY

I conclude that the Caribbean (including Jamaica) has a difficult task in ridding our region of poverty, but not insurmountable! I think that this matter has to be solved with each member state coming together as one. Take for instances at this time, if one looks at our super market shelves, one can see snacks originating from Trinidad and Tobago. But when Jamaica tried to export our ‘patties’ to them it was barred. Although the states of the Caribbean have decided to be apart of the Caribbean Common Market, some states have not held up to their end the agreement.

This results in discontent among member states and ultimately the loss of jobs and the increase in poverty due to their inability to allow free trade in the area.

The states in the Caribbean need to realize that individually, compared to the international arena are small and relatively insignificant. But joining together and being one in mind set, we could be a force to be reckoned with. As a people we need to assist each other in terms of the transference of education, science and technology in order to boost each other’s economies. Thus providing an improved way of thinking and reasoning which will result in a motivated, determined move by the people of this region to rid ourselves of poverty. If not, then to a level that permits an acceptable standard of living.

As the cliche states “together we stand, divided we fall” we as people of the Caribbean need to learn and understand this. To allow this statement to change their mind set from one of individuality and selfishness to one of togetherness and fruitfulness which will ultimately raise the standard of life for our people and in time reduce the levels of poverty in order to maintain an acceptable standard of living; free from hungry tyranny and illness. What do you think? This is just a wish or fantasy! I should hope not. As I choose to think that it can be a reality IF WE WORK HARD AND KEEP FOCUSED!