Sep 07

The Waiting Generation

It is relatively simple to describe the life of an individual who falls into the “waiting” generation category.  Members of this new generation are recent college graduates, hard-working former students looking for jobs in their respective fields, and coming to the stark realization that they will not land a job coming out of school.  Some of these graduates are panicking because they have college debts to pay, and others, who may be of a more laid-back nature, are trying to roll with the punches.  However, the common thread connecting a vast majority of recent college graduates is the fact that they are waiting for jobs; they are in an economic limbo.

Though it is easy to advise recent college graduates, who fall into the above described category, to wait until the economy has a turn around, the effects of a jobless youth sector is quite alarming.  The unemployment rate for youth between the ages of 16 and 24, including those with only high school diplomas, is 18.9 percent.  Such a high unemployment rate for American youth means that young people are extremely discouraged with the lack of jobs in the occupational fields they had focused on for four or more years in college.  Since job hunting has become difficult, many post-college graduates are looking for any job that pays the bills and puts food on the table, but such jobs are not necessarily careers.  According to the Heldrich Survey, the number of college graduates who have depicted their first post-school jobs as careers has fallen more than 30 percent from 2008 onwards.  Unfortunately, even second and third job positions were described as lackluster and not stable career fields like medicine, law, education, etc.  Instead of securing and advancing career jobs, recent graduates have been jumping from job to job in the hopes of landing something better.

Chief economists across the United States have explained that recent college graduates with bachelor’s degrees or higher make up approximately 30 percent of the labor sector.  The high unemployment rate has caused college graduates to either give up looking for jobs or wait around for the economy to get better, which in turn has caused graduates to fall out of the labor pool.  The shrinking of the labor sector signifies that college graduates are either going back to school for further education, giving up on hunting for a job, or looking for jobs that do not necessarily require a college degree; like waitressing, bartending, babysitting, etc.  Unfortunately, lower income jobs already have their own core sector of workers who need such jobs to survive.  As college graduates, who are unable to find jobs in their field, trickle into lower income jobs, they take away positions and opportunities for others who are already in that job field. Ultimately, college graduates as well as individuals with only high school diplomas, suffer from a high unemployment rate because of graduates leaving the labor pool to look for jobs elsewhere.
The statistics and information about recent college graduates is sad, dire, and in need of a major boost.  As the economy continues to remain in a state of disarray, those with expensive college degrees with dreams of secure futures, suffer in a post-education world.  If the economy does not manage to right itself, the waiting generation will evolve into millions of people who graduated from college, landed mediocre jobs, and get paid significantly lower than those who graduated in a healthier economy.  This, in turn, will cause a new group of people to emerge, a group of highly educated individuals who may not even make it into the middle-class stratum because they have no “career” based employment.  The frustration and unhappiness that can arise from such a situation can lead to a decrease in people entering bachelor’s programs because it seems almost useless to begin a four year education without a guarantee of success at the end of the road.  For that reason, it is important to transform the waiting generation into a generation of graduates who, after a short wait, do reap the benefits of getting a college education.

Share

Sep 07

Saving Lives through Public Transportation

I recently read an article about a mother, Raquel, that had
been sentenced to prison for the death of her child, after a car hit her son (who
consequently died) as he crossed the street. The mother was sentenced in spite
of the fact that the driver who ran over them was drunk.

An accident like this involves more than what it seems. It
is not only about  what has been classified as  irresponsible parenting or about a drunk driver. It is a consequence of bad transit services and bad urban design. I think it is
unfair to blame a mother of killing her son when the streets are designed in a
way that inevitably puts pedestrians at risk. Near Raquel’s home, there
are no clear walkways or bridges that allow pedestrians to cross the street
under safe conditions (see video from PBS).

Watch the full episode. See more Need To Know.

In a country were the cars are the ones to rule the streets,
the pedestrians have difficulty to survive. Indeed, pedestrians and transit
riders are the ones to suffer the most from the bad public transportation
system of the United States. It is estimated that 43,700 pedestrians have been killed in the last 10 years because of the unsafe roads and walkways. This is an astounding number indicating that policies should change in order to diminish it. Having safe transportation would protect the lives of many people and is a safety and equity issue.

Raquel’s case illustrates this because it is the sole consequence of bad transit
services. But why is it important to campaign for good transit service even
if we are not a transit user?

First of all, the environmental impact would decrease. Using
and promoting public transit is important because it will help reduce greenhouse
gas emissions. Public transportation is the most effective and cheap way to
transport people around cities and around the country. Comparing transit to
other “green” alternatives (such as the electric car), and improving the transit
system is the best way to reduce emissions. For example, the environmental
impact of the residents of New York City is inferior to that of the residents
of Los Angeles or Atlanta because most of them use the MTA’s services.  Transit improvement should be a central policy to any city that wishes to decrease its carbon footprint. Moreover, as car use becomes more expensive (oil prices rising for example), many people will have to look for other methods of transportation. If public transit is well designed (safe and accessible), more and more users will be able to save money by becoming transit riders. This will be beneficial not only for the environment, but also for our pockets.

On the other hand, increasing the use of public transit would also decrease traffic. With more bus riders, there are less cars on the road and the roads are less crowded. This is the case in Mexico City, where people complain about the serious traffic problems. The problem largely exists because there are too many cars on the roads. Everyone complains about the traffic, but few people are willing to become a transit user because the transit system is over-crowded as well. Even though the government has been building many new roads (it has even built a 2-level highway), the traffic is still very significant. I think that the long term solution would be to improve the subway (create more stations so that it reaches more neighborhoods) and the bus routes (create special bus lanes). Of course, improving public transit won’t be of any use unless more people start using transit. Therefore, it is also necessary that public transportation is actively promoted by the government.

Additionally, I think that using public transportation is beneficial to everyone because it allows us to use our time in smarter and more productive ways. We spend too much time commuting and driving (particularly in developing countries were fast urban growth has increased traffic so much). On the bus, train, or subway, we are able to read, write or make phone calls which we cannot do when driving. Finally, using public transit is also a good workout for the body and good for the health. Walking to the bus station or walking up and down the stairs of the subway would be very beneficial for those with a somewhat sedentary lifestyle.

A good transportation grid should assure the safety and improve the standard of living of all citizens. Transit use is not the main method of transportation in the United States. Nevertheless, policy makers should be bold enough to start designing and planning a new transportation grid that improves and promotes transit. Until the public transportation grid is improved significantly in many cities around the globe, there will still be the same amount of car riders and therefore pedestrians may continue to face dangerous roadways.

Julia Naime is a research intern at the SISGI Group. She
is a student at New York University. During her internship, she will focus on
Rural development, International Economics and Environmental Policies.
Share

Sep 02

The Silver Bullet

Those of you who have spent any time with me over the past few months have probably noted my burgeoning obsession with reruns of the tv series The West Wing. In his Emmy-winning show, which documents the administration of fictional liberal president Josiah Bartlett, Aaron Sorkin writes intelligent dialogue, develops characters the audience cares about, and introduces policy positions that Americans can spend their next few days debating with friends. One such position, proclaimed by Deputy Communications Chair Sam Seaborn, reminded me of the role and state of public education today:

Education is the silver bullet. Education is everything. We don’t need little changes. We need gigantic revolutionary changes. Schools should be palaces. Competition for the best teachers should be fierce. They should be getting six-figure salaries. Schools should be incredibly expensive for government and absolutely free of charge for its citizens, just like national defense. That is my position. I just haven’t figured out how to do it yet.

This sentiment, though probably infeasible, is certainly laudable. Education provides individuals with opportunities they never would have gotten without it. Even without the opportunities it brings, education is inherently valuable because many of us are inquisitive and want to learn for the sake of learning. It’s not good just for those who receive it. Educating one man can benefit all of society. So much innovation and economic growth result from education. It also allows for citizens to be more informed, which presumably makes our governmental leaders more accountable and improves our democracy. Having educated citizens should be a hallmark of civilized society. Just as all people should have the right to health care, civil liberties, and protection from our armed forces, we should all have the right to learn.

But in spite of its importance, education is not always treated with the importance that it warrants. Unfortunately, after a decade of irresponsible spending, our government is facing a deficit that requires budget cuts. In North Carolina, where I live, we have observed cuts to public schools in each of the past three years. North Carolina Governor’s School, a free summer program for high achieving high school students, lost all of its state funding. Even universities are facing budget cuts. For example, the University of North Carolina – Wilmington is considering cutting the Physics department.

I fear that the pendulum is swinging in the opposite direction that Seaborn had hoped. Some of our schools more closely resemble overpopulated slums than palaces. The median teacher salary is closer to zero than it is to six figures. And income disparities between the rich and poor remain as high as ever.

Why is education not taken as seriously as Sam suggested? Yes, as our governmental leaders suggest it would be expensive to put more money into our schools. But important services such as education should be of top notch quality. We make more than enough sacrifices to make sure our national defense is the best in the world. Why can’t we do the same with our schools? People need to understand the importance of education from a societal perspective. If they can push this agenda through to our political leaders, perhaps our schools will stop lagging behind.

Times are tough now, but education will ultimately save this country. This is not the time to cut funding for it. Since the technological revolution, the world has been shrinking at an exponential rate. To keep up, if we plan to develop an efficient alternative fuel source to get rid of reliance on foreign oil and to curtail global warming,  and if we plan to communicate and do business with foreign countries, we need to continue to train engineers, innovators, businessmen, and diplomats. We need people studying engineering and science, economics and math, history and Mandarin and Hindi. What’s a better stimulus package than ensuring that our next generation of graduates are prepared to function at a high level in the real world?

The way our government’s budget looks right now, we can’t increase investment in education. We are left with two options: cutting spending on education or raising tax revenues. Budget cuts on education will only delay the bleeding. Sooner or later, having a poorly educated public will come back to haunt us. Thus, we have no option but to somehow raise tax revenues.

A few weeks ago, Warren Buffett published an op-ed in the New York Times in which he proposed raising taxes on Americans making over 1 million dollars. He even suggests that raising taxes on the rich shouldn’t significantly deter people from making good investments, which is the argument often made by supply-side economists. Over the next few months, a super committee of 6 Republican and 6 Democrat Congressmen will meet to try to reduce the deficit by $1.5 trillion. Considering our ability to educate our youth may be up for grabs, I really hope they consider Buffet’s proposal and take Sam Seaborn’s words to heart.

Shaunak Varma is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org.
Share

Sep 01

Ramadan: A Recap

In late July I wrote a post about Ramadan and how it might affect the Arab Spring nations; now that Ramadan is over, I thought it might be interesting to look back over what actually did happen.  In my post I wrote about the uncertainty surrounding the holy month this year: would the violence escalate as Muslims had more time to congregate and discuss their options, or would the violence cease as people focused on friends, family, and the Qur’an?  Would the rebels lose their fighting spirit after fasting all day, or would their urge to fight grow with the rising food prices common during Ramadan?

My post was not terribly optimistic, and it seems I was, sadly, right—though I had no idea the extent of the violence that would occur during Ramadan.  For Syria, Ramadan marked one of the bloodiest months of the uprising.  According to the Syrian Revolution Coordinating Union (a group of activists which documents the protests), 551 people were killed during Ramadan, and an additional 130 were killed on the eve of Ramadan, July 31.  And on Tuesday, which marked the start of Eid ul-Fitr or the end of Ramadan, 7 more people were killed after security forces fired on worshippers as they left the mosques.  According to the Local Coordination Committees (another group which documents protests), police forces and secret police had been camped out near mosques to deter people from praying, since the rebels often use the mosques as meeting places.

In Yemen, too, Ramadan did not bring hope or an end to the violence.  Though Yemen is not as violent as Syria, it too is in the midst of a severe economic and political crisis, and while Ramadan was somewhat of a distraction from all that, it was not enough.  Various political groups have been stocking up on heavy weaponry and the fighting has continued, despite the holiday.  On Tuesday, for example, the Yemeni Defense Minister’s military convoy was attacked, killing two but leaving the minister unharmed.

Ramadan was also quite violent in Libya, though with a decidedly better outcome for the rebels. The Syrian government remains in control of the country, Yemen remains in complete upheaval, but the Libyan government is in shambles.  Gadhafi is on the run, and though his son claims that the war is not yet over, the rebels do have control of much of the city and are already planning democratic elections. So despite the increase in violence over the past few weeks, Libyans are much more upbeat than their Syrian and Yemeni neighbors, more hopeful for the future.  Still, the situation in Libya is rather grim.  Though the rebels are happily celebrating their first Eid without Gadhafi in decades, they are also mourning the many who perished during the revolution.  Also, there are severe food, water, and electricity shortages throughout the country, meaning that the celebrations are forced by circumstance to be fairly low-key.

So, as you can see, Ramadan had different effects in each country—just as I wrote in my last post.  Some countries, like Libya, had a better month than others, though nowhere did Ramadan trigger a ceasefire.  There is still hope, though.  Ramadan may not have marked an end to the struggles in the Middle East and North Africa, but it did not mark a capitulation, either.  The situation is rough—government crackdowns, food shortages, energy shortages—but the people are not giving up the fight.

Michelle Bovée is a SISGI Group Program and Research Intern focused on international affairs, economic development, and responsible tourism. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org

Share

Sep 01

Killing Genius

Over the past several weeks, I have gotten addicted to chess. I can’t get enough. I got my chess set that had been stashed away for years in my closet so I could play my Dad, played people online, and even stayed up until the early hours of the morning watching videos and commentary of famous chess games.

I recently stumbled across a game now nicknamed “The Game of the Century.” In the game, a 13-year-old Bobby Fischer defeated Donald Byrne, one of the best American chess players in the 1950s and 1960s. Fischer sacrificed his queen early in the game so that he could later launch an offensive and capture many of Byrne’s other pieces, and ultimately checkmate Byrne. (If you know the basics of chess, I highly recommend watching this video. It explains the rationale of Fischer’s moves). I had always heard that Fischer was one of the greatest minds in chess, but I was in awe of the foresight he showed at the

age of 13. Fischer was like Mozart, like Shakespeare, like Monet. He was so innately skilled in his craft that he had become an artist. I had to know more about this mind.

I came across an article that showed that Fischer, like many geniuses, had an eccentric personality and a psychologically troubling life. Fischer was often described as socially “awkward, provocative, argumentative, and unhappy.” He was also fiercely paranoid. Fischer, a key source of American pride during the Cold War because of his ability to beat Russian Grandmasters, was concerned that opponents were trying to poison his food or that Russians intended on bugging his rooms and tampering airplanes that he flied in. In fact, he was so scared of Russians that he got the fillings in his mouth taken out so that nothing artificial was in his body that could potentially be used to pick up radio transmissions. He often made off-putting comments to the media, where he often revealed his deep anti-Semitism and even announced that he was jubilant about the September 11th attacks.

There are certainly genetic factors that suggest that Fischer might not have been completely stable mentally. Both of his parents are suspected to have had mental illnesses, and some of his other family members have committed suicide. He also had a difficult childhood. He struggled with his identity, as he was not certain who his biological father was. He underachieved in school and was eventually expelled for kicking his principal. His mother was under surveillance by the FBI, which exacerbated his paranoia. His relationship with his mother was also tumultuous, as she wanted him to be more “normal” and to “cure” his addiction to chess. Finally, he also had to deal with his celebrity status early in his childhood.

While it is impossible for me to say whether Fischer’s eccentricities were a result of genius or madness, his life serves as an interesting case study on how we do and how we should treat genius. While we cannot change someone’s genetic makeup, we can influence how people treat him. Most people are fascinated with individual brilliance. This is why there is so much coverage on geniuses and superstars such as Fischer, John Nash, Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, and LeBron James. There is so much at stake with these uber-talented people.

Although some live up to their promising potential and remain mentally sound, many others do not. We need to be more careful in how we treat them, especially in their youth. We probably cannot completely shut off the media from these people, but we should try to ensure that the media does not put even more pressure on these prodigies. Thus, the media should have really limited access to prodigies during their adolescence. Joseph Ponterotto, the author of the essay “A Psychological Autopsy of Bobby Fischer,” suggests that parents should also receive training on how to raise these types of children. He also advises that these people be taken under the wing of older, successful talents who have learned to manage their exceptional innate abilities with the rest of their life.

What if, in spite of precautions, prodigies lose mental stability? After all, some “madness” could be what is driving their brilliance. Who knows if Van Gogh, Hemmingway, or Nietzsche would have managed to produce such significant work had they been completely sane? Perhaps if Fischer had received extensive psychotherapy when he was young, he would have lost his obsession with chess and failed to achieve greatness. At the same time, perhaps Hemmingway wouldn’t have committed suicide had he received therapy earlier in life. Should people with these high abilities risk their potential and receive therapy? These are ethical questions I struggle mightily with. While I think all people should strive to reach their full potential, it is inhumane to blatantly withhold helping these people out of fear that they may lose some of their stellar productivity.

I think a decision to pursue therapy should be made by the prodigy himself. Fischer did not want to pursue this option. Many people had noted Fischer’s erratic behavior during his childhood, and when the board of governors of the Marshall Chess Club in New York City met to discuss whether they should find him a psychiatrist, they wondered:

What if therapy worked? What if treatment sapped Fischer’s drive to win, depriving the United States of its first homegrown world champ? Meeting adjourned. No one wanted to tamper with that finely tuned brain.

I agree with the Marshall Chess Club’s decision. Since Fischer did not want therapy and was still able to succeed in the thing he did best, forcing a psychiatrist upon him might have had dire consequences. After all, who wants to kill genius?

Shaunak Varma is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org.

Share

Aug 29

The Reading Gap

Reading is one of the most important skills that children learn because it helps with all aspects of their lives.  Unfortunately, recent studies are showing that there is an increasing reading gap between boys and girls.  As each year passes, studies show that more and more boys are developing a deep dislike for reading.  This growing disdain for reading has been affecting boys in a plethora of ways, including consistently performing poorly on standardized tests across the United States.  However, the main question is, why do boys not like to read, and what can be done to remedy the issue?

Though a wide variety of young adult fiction books are published each year, Donald Gallo, a retired English professor at Central Connecticut State University, explains that many of these books are simply not geared towards boys.  In fact, fiction is not the ideal genre for boys because they tend to want to read nonfiction books.  Schools, however, require students to read classic fiction books, which pose two problems for boys.  One, the books are fiction, and most boys are not interested in fiction books, and two, the classic selections are considered boring whereas a newer age book may have potential for being more interesting.  Gallo suggests that boys need to be approached with books individually in order to assess what they like, which topics interest them, and encourage reading books that are more tailored to their interests.  Unfortunately, reading agendas for schools are not created with an individual student in mind.

However, another theory shows that boys will actually sit down and read books, but the right books are required to capture their attention.  Recent book trends show that more female writers have been dominating the young adult field, and their books showcase females as the main characters of the novels.  These books are designed and published with teenage girls in mind, and such gender specific fictional books are not exactly keeping young boys in mind.  For that reason, Jon Scieszka created guysread.com, and puts up lists of books that may be more efficient at capturing a boy’s attention.  In this way, boys will be able to find books that they can sit down and enjoy, and their reading skills will slowly but surely get better.

The reading gap between boys and girls is a particularly interesting study because it provides some insight into the results of the Alliance for Positive Youth Development’s 18 and under needs assessment.  The assessment revealed that 27 out of 35 percent of responders believe problems in education to be an issue that predominantly affects boys.  After reviewing information that proves that most boys do not enjoy reading, it may be that problems in education affect many boys because their reading skills are not at the same level as girls.  Since reading is a crucial tool needed to perform well in school, boys may be struggling because they lack proper reading skills.

To learn more about pressing youth issues, and the results of the APYD Needs Assessment, register for the “State of Youth-Issues Impacting Youth Under 25” webinar.  The webinar will take place on August 31st from 2-3 pm EST.  For more information and updates, follow the APYD team @ideas4youth on twitter, like us on Facebook, or sign up for a newsletter.

Share

Aug 29

Making Things Better

In my latest article, I claimed “power corrupts when allowed to exist unsupervised.” This claim doesn’t just apply to prison guards. It also extends to politicians, businessmen, and other people in positions of power. The widespread corruption around the world supports this claim. Every year, billions of dollars are laundered around the world. Corruption is particularly bad in India, where approximately 1.4 trillion dollars have been stashed away in foreign banks. This “black money,” often deposited by the wealthiest Indians, is untaxed. 1.4 trillion USD is not an insignificant amount. In fact, it is slightly more than Indian GDP.

After generations of seeing widespread and blatant corruption, the Indian public has had enough. Over the past 6 months, Indian social activist Anna Hazare has spearheaded an Anti-Corruption Movement. He hoped to get the Jan Lokpal Bill in Indian Parliament, which would help limit government, police, judicial, and corporate corruption.

The Anti-Corruption Movement continued to gain momentum, and on August 16, Hazare, a Gandhian, announced that he would go on an indefinite fast until the Lokbal Bill became law. On the same day, Hazare was arrested by Delhi police for refusing to follow orders to stay at his home. Hazare also refused to leave jail and remained detained until August 18th, when the Delhi police finally granted him permission to fast as a statement against corruption. Hazare continued to gain support from Bollywood actors, musicians, athletes, and millions of other Indian citizens. Just today, the Indian Parliament acquiesced to Hazare’s demands, and after 12 days of fasting, Hazare finally ended his hunger strike. Parliament unanimously agreed to create an anticorruption agency, which will oversee the government and attempt to prevent corruption.

As an American of Indian origin, I have followed this news story with pride. I am amazed that so many people united and made sacrifices to do what was right. The story reminded of the quotation by Margaret Mead that my supervisor Thenera includes at the bottom of all her e-mails:

Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.

I often worry that cynicism has stifled our passion. We live in a world where political leaders receive millions of dollars from lobbyists and corporations. Sure, our country was founded on democratic principles, but it often seems like the voices of the elite are heard more often and more loudly than the voices of the masses. But no matter how much money lobbyists and organizations pay a candidate to fund his campaign, he cannot get elected without the support of the people. Hazare and his followers serve as an inspirational reminder to the rest of the world that we do not have to blindly accept the status quo. We can still achieve great things. The onus starts not with our leaders but with us to make things better.

India is not alone. All countries are prone to experience corruption. I recently read about two judges in Scranton, Pennsylvania who accepted millions of dollars from owners of privately-run juvenile detention centers. These judges would not tell defendants their constitutional rights and often gave defendants disproportionate sentences for crimes. Over 4,000 cases were invalidated. Such corruption from our judges is despicable and unacceptable. Kids were jailed simply because a judge wanted to profit. While the culprits have been discovered and punished in Scranton, there is bound to be similar corruption elsewhere. If citizens find evidence of such corruption, they should not hesitate to follow in Hazare’s footsteps.

Civil disobedience is not a novel concept unique to Hazare. Transcendentalists such as Henry Thoreau preached these ideas over a century ago. Independence and civil rights leaders such as Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Jr., and Nelson Mandela used Thoreau’s teachings to earn freedom for people in their respective countries. Its effectiveness everywhere demonstrates that all people are empowered to change the world where they see injustice. When we see injustices as egregious as the ones in Scranton, we should not hesitate to use some of these same techniques to do what is right and make things better.

 

Shaunak Varma is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group. To learn more about the SISGI Group visit www.sisgigroup.org.
Share

Aug 26

Women’s Equality Day

“I call upon the people of the United States to celebrate the achievements of women and recommit ourselves to the goal of gender equality in this country.”

–          President Barack Obama

Today has officially been declared Women’s Equality Day in the United States—yet it is widely unheard of by most Americans.  On August 26, 1920, women were granted the right to vote with the passage of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  It is a day that has been proclaimed as such by every President, every year since 1971 when it was first introduced by Rep. Bella Abzug.  It is a day to commemorate the courageous women who battled for more than 70 years to achieve suffrage and formal political equality.  Yet, it is also a day to recognize that there is a long road ahead before all Americans achieve freedom.

What is special and unique about the women’s rights movement is that it is not about achieving equality and freedom solely for women—it is about achieving suffrage for all human beings despite race, religion, sexuality, age, economic status, and so forth.  In essence, it is a movement about civil liberties that formally began in 1848 at the Seneca Falls Convention.  Nevertheless, it was years in the making even before the convention, having its foundation in the abolitionist movement.  Women in the 19th century played a significant role in the fight to end slavery that eventually led to the passage of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, all of which were ratified many years before women were granted the right to vote and still considered second-class citizens.

Although political equality has been achieved, in a sense, freedom has not been.  And considering that the women’s right movement is as much about general social justice as it is about women’s justice, the revolution is far from over.  Yes, we have come a long way.  It is not uncommon to see women in strong leadership roles in the workplace, as students on college campuses, as equal to their husbands under law, etc.  You can look at the 3 (arguably 4) waves of feminism and really envision the progression—but you can also conceptualize the many lacks of freedom that exist.  On average, women only make 77 cents to every dollar men do.  This is even lower for women of color—61 cents if African American and 52 cents if Latina.  Women outnumber men as college graduates, yet most top-level professions continue to be male-dominated.  For example, only 17% of women make up Congress.  Another example is that of Walmart, the largest U.S. employer, with 70% of its workforce being women.  Yet, only 30% are in managerial roles.  The Supreme Court recently dismissed a large class-action lawsuit claiming gender discrimination that could have covered approximately 1.5 million women—demonstrating limitations in the judicial system in allowing for equality and freedom to be exercised.  You can read more about gender inequality in the workplace in my previous blog post here.  Some of the other riveting inequality issues today include that of sexuality (i.e. same-sex marriage is not a constitutional “right” and only passed formally in 6 states); the increasing gap between the rich and poor and near disappearance of the middle class; the disparity in earnings between races; generational inequalities targeted at the young and the old; and ongoing battles over reproductive rights—just to name a few.

While there are several federal laws “protecting” the rights of individuals and claiming equality, freedom for all has not been achieved.  Celebrating the many milestones achieved in obtaining civil rights is very important, but so is recognizing that there is much more to be accomplished.  Let’s take the day to reflect on the past and mobilize for the future.

Cynthia Castaldo-Walsh is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Groupfocused on gender-based conflict, non-violence and peacebuilding for conflict transformation, and sustainability for conflict resolution.
Share

Aug 25

Microfinance Must Return to its Roots

Microfinance has become something of a buzzword in recent years (depending on which circles you run in), and the industry’s increase in popularity has also lead to an increase in criticism.  You may remember my last post about microfinance, as well as the posts written by my colleagues, but for those of you who don’t, here’s a quick overview: Microfinancing companies operate by providing low-cost loans to low-income borrowers, who often do not have access to traditional banking services.  Women tend to be the focus of the loans, since they typically do not have access to banks or financial institutions and because they have proven to be more successful at repaying loans.  Microfinancing activities include a wide variety of banking activities, such as microlending and microcredit, and those terms are typically used interchangeably by us lay-persons.

Supporters of microfinance point to the large number of people who have been lifted out of poverty in countries like India and Ghana as a result of microfinance institutions.  For example, a recent survey conducted by the Microcredit Summit Campaign found that approximately 9 million Indian households involved in microfinance rose above the $1.25 poverty threshold between 1990 and 2010. The microfinance industry boomed in India after 1998, so the 9 million increase is quite significant.  A survey in Bangladesh found similar results, reinforcing the link between microloans and poverty reduction.

Critics, however, are quick to point out that the surveys were not intended to show causality, meaning that the results cannot be used to imply that microfinancing institutions lead to poverty reduction.  The EPPI-Centre conducted an exhaustive examination of the microfinance sector and found that there is currently no clear evidence that microfinance programs have positive impacts.  The industry is too new, and there are no adequate research methods to determine whether or not there is a true link between microfinance and reducing poverty.

Perhaps the biggest criticism of microfinance, however, is simply that the popularity of the industry has prompted companies seeking only profit and companies focused on offering loans for consumption smoothing to pop up.  Those two things run counter to the original goals of microfinance.  Microfinance institutions originally offered small, low-cost loans to people without access to banks or financial services, and so raising the rates on the loans in order to make a profit would only contribute to poverty, not reduce it.  The industry is mostly unregulated, and so it was easy for people to hop on the microfinance bandwagon while focusing more on profit than a sustainable impact.  Further, the loans were intended to be just that—loans—and to be given only to entrepreneurs and enterprises.

Think of it like the American economic crisis from a few years back.  Loans were offered to pretty much anyone who bothered to ask for one, regardless of whether or not they had the capacity to pay it back, at very high interest rates.  So people kept borrowing and borrowing, using the new loans to pay back their old loans and to continue their standard of living (consumption smoothing), and only ended up going further and further into debt (of course, this is a simplification of the crisis for the purposes of comparison).  If microloans are offered to anyone, regardless of whether or not they have a business plan or the ability to pay off the debt, at high interest rates, how is that going to help anyone?  The way I see it, the microfinance industry has to go back to its roots as an industry dedicated to helping small businessmen (and women) get enough money to fund their enterprise.  That will result in job creation, which will do much more for poverty reduction than handing out loans left and right.

Getting the microfinance industry to return to its roots, however, will not be easy.  As I mentioned earlier, the industry is almost entirely unregulated, meaning there is no one to stop microfinance companies from giving loans at high interest rates to people without business plans or the ability to launch a new enterprise.   Continue reading

Share

Aug 24

PETA Porn: Effective or Extreme?

Members of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, also known as PETA, have gone to extreme measures to get their animal rights messages across to the public in the past.  As the largest animal rights organization in the world, with millions of members and supporters, PETA has managed to attain many successful and high-profile victories for the voiceless creatures they fight for.  From protesting half naked outside of Fashion Week to recruiting celebrity sex icons to run racy advertising campaigns, their approaches have been controversial.  Yet, their newest initiative may be the most outrageous yet.  PETA recently registered the domain name peta.xxx and plans on combining sexually explicit content with graphic pictures of animal abuse.

As an animal rights supporter and defender of PETA’s mission, I admire much of the work the organization does to protect animals from suffering.  However, I can’t help but to ponder the effectiveness of some of their actions such as the PETA porn site.  In the advertising world, it is no secret that sex sells.  However, there is a thin line between sexiness and sexual exploitation.  While PETA is crusading to end animal exploitation, they seem to be promoting human exploitation.  Are they sending the wrong message?

PETA defends their use of nudity and controversial tactics publically on their website.  Comparing their actions to that of Lady Godiva, PETA suggests that they must use attention-grabbing campaigns in order to obtain free advertising that reaches the masses.  They argue that going up against their wealthy competitors—animal-killing supporters—is almost impossible without taking extreme measures to attract news coverage.  PETA spokeswoman Ashley Byrne gave a statement regarding the launch of their upcoming porn site: “We are preparing to launch our own peta.xxx site, but instead of just showing people our iconic ads we then show them how animals suffer for entertainment…. Our racier actions are sometimes a way to get people to sit up and pay attention to the plight of animals.”  Ok, that’s great—but what about the plight of humans?

PETA has been criticized for their use of women as sex objects to attract attention to their cause—and the porn site is no exception.  While the peta.xxx site is already getting a ton of negative attention—attention nonetheless—it seems to be exactly what the organization is aiming for in order to attract people to their campaign.  However, will viewing a video combining disturbing animal abuse clips and provocative images of women really persuade people to start eating vegetables rather than meat?  It seems as though their attempt is a deluded one.  In my opinion, viewers will be more interested in viewing the women on the site rather than sympathizing with the animals.  PETA’s current initiative appears to be just another of many that objectifies and poorly represents women—although they would argue against that.

PETA stands by the peta.xxx campaign.  Spokeswomen Byrne stated: “They [women partaking in the porn video] have a choice to do so. Animals don’t have a choice. A cow doesn’t have a choice to be made pregnant over and over again only to have their babies taken away.”  Yes, this is true.  But, why is it that women have to sexually exploit themselves to attract attention to a cause?  Whether it is a choice or not, the underlying premise behind the site is to attract an audience that views women as sexual objects, hoping to gain some kind of attention to animal harm.

What are your thoughts on PETA’s current and past initiatives to attract attention to animal rights?

Cynthia Castaldo-Walsh is a Program and Research Intern with the SISGI Group focused on gender-based conflict, non-violence and peacebuilding for conflict transformation, and sustainability for conflict resolution.
Share