In 1972, Harvey Milk and his partner Scott Smith leave New York and move to San Francisco because Harvey Milk wants to accomplish something big as well as be accepted for his same-sex relationship. He starts a camera shop and creates a hotspot for gays and lesbians from all over focusing on being a gay activist. He later transformed to being a political activist and accomplished just that by changing history when he was elected to the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, being the first openly gay person elected into office in America. Just a year later he was shot and killed in cold blood by Dan White which caused uproar across the world (Cohen, B., & Jinks, D. (Producers), & Van Sant, G. (Director). (2008). Milk [Motion picture on DVD]. United states: Universal.).

The overarching conflict during this time was that Harvey Milk and other gay and lesbians were not being accepted for their sexuality. Many were “in the closet,” or in other words hiding their true identity to protect themselves from rejection and social discrimination. This prohibited them to live their lives the way they dreamed which in Harvey Milk’s case was to be on the Board of Supervisors which was the main reason he moved to San Francisco. This conflict is seen throughout the whole movie,but especially in the opening scene when he talks with his lover about moving to San Francisco because of the differences. The whole film focuses on the conflict of mass struggle for the LGBT movement.

Labels represent a way of identifying people that is considered by many as a form of prejudice and discrimination. In this particular case labeling people derives from the way of perceiving members of the gay and lesbian gender group. Everybody in the town of San Francisco held a certain negative point of view toward this gay and lesbian group of people because of their homosexuality.

All throughout my life as I was taught from my parents and from the bible was that God created man and woman. All throughout the Bible it speaks of man and woman and nothing else. In my opinion, I do not think it is right to be homosexual or anything else besides being straight. I was also taught that we as men and women we cannot judge one another, but leave that duty to God. I hold tight to the beliefs that I know and hold true to God’s word.

Throughout the whole movie Harvey Milk and his followers were building strategies, holding meetings, and marching on the streets. In many scenes Harvey Milk says that it isn’t about him, but everyone. He did it for the gay community as a whole not just for himself. Towards the end of the movie many marches and speeches took place because the LGBT community wanted their rights, but everyone else was against them. The “We must fight” scene shows power and oppression when Harvey Milk speaks out loudly that everyone must come out of the closet and not hold back while the police and others are trying to hold back this movement. The tension between the LGBT community and the police broke out. Policemen would come into bars and take men out and beat them in the streets. The police would then arrest them for 'blocking traffic'.

Harvey continues to speak to the huge crowd and tell them that they can’t just let the people tell them what do on television by listening to those with power saying that there isn’t any place for them in this great country, this world. He says they must be active and support their cause.

Prejudice is seen when the negative reactions of society are seen against this gay rights movement. In this film, a small boy comes up to Harvey Milk, not knowing who he truly is, and asks him to vote for the other guy who is running against Harvey Milk. This shows that the boys parents are teaching him to have that negative reaction to gay people when the boy himself doesn’t even understand. Discrimination is the unjust treatment of people based on gender in this instance. During this time the movie took place in America, being openly gay was a huge risk. You could lose your job, friends and family, or even your life. Harvey Milk and mayor George Moscone were assassinated by Dan White because of the difference that lay between them even after Harvey Milk tried to work things out with Dan.

Discrimination is seen when Harvey Milk is running for election to be on the Board of Supervisors. He is mocked for his sexuality while giving public speeches, but he continues to try and run successfully for public office while promoting laws to encourage workers from discrimination in employment due to their sexuality. Again, the reason he moved from New York to San Francisco was to be accepted as a gay man looking for opportunity. Harvey Milk told everyone that people from all over are all looking to San Francisco and this march tonight for leadership. The LGBT community had to give these young people hope.

Even while starting a camera business he was looked down on. Milk and Smith would kiss openly, excited to be in business, and the neighbor makes his displeasure known. Milk says they are opening their business and asks how to become successful. The neighbor responds by telling them they can't because the police will just shut them down because they are gay. This led to one consequence which was anger, but Milk was determined and didn’t let that stand in the way. Gays from all over moved to that location so that the whole community could feel accepted. This neighborhood was known as Castro Street. Harvey Milk’s determination on not being in secret or invisible anymore is what eventually turned him from his camera business to his study and run for politics. He gave many speeches,but most of them started with a simple introduction of himself and then, “I want to recruit you.” This didn’t settle with the straight people in the community because it made Harvey Milk feel like he had power, but he simply wants the discrimination to end.

Some consequences seen because of discrimination include fear, anger, and even job loss and ruined relationships for different sexually oriented people. One consequence was that Harvey Milk’s relationship with Smith ended because Smith was angered at all the political business. Then, Harvey’s new relationship with Jack Lira quickly came to an end because he was more of an obstacle with the politics Harvey was pursuing. This led to Jack’s death as a suicide and later Harvey Milk’s own death by assassination because of his sexual viewpoint.

Someone with the same culture, identity, biases, prejudices, and stereotypes as me would be someone who is ultimately against the gay community, but still must do good to them. The storyline would have changed in the fact that Harvey Milk would have been able to be on the board easier and their would not have been anybody who had to die although I wouldn’t truly vote for him or against him. Though I don't think being gay is right at all, I must accept that. I was taught throughout my life that we must only hate the sin, not the sinner. This is true in this case for me.

Cite this page

Jaqueline Woodson once said, “Diversity is about all of us, and about us having to figure out how to walk through this world together”. Does this still reign true? When it comes to Hollywood, in the past few years it has been a topic of debate on whether Hollywood is diverse. Film and television has come a long way since it first began. We now see women working behind the scenes, people of all races having leading roles, and members of the LGBT community being represented on the screen. However, we have a long way to go to show the true representation of everyone and prove that film and television can be just as successful, if not more, when it works to represent all of us as a whole.

?When it comes to the discussion of diversity in Hollywood, a major topic that comes to most people’s minds is the lack of racial diversity within, not only films and television, but behind the scenes. In UCLA’s 2018 Hollywood diversity report, it was found that only 1.4 out of 10 lead actors in a film were people of color. When it came to the rest of the cast, white actors made up 78.1% of actors. Latino, Asian, Mixed, and Native actors made up the rest of the numbers with Native actors coming in last at only 0.5% (UCLA). These numbers are very low for minorities.

?A movie that helped to break these numbers is this year’s Black Panther. The film debuted with an estimated $700 million dollars in global sales within the first 12 days. It even beat out Star Wars: The Last Jedi for the spot of second largest movie opening in history (Lee). The movie was groundbreaking with its use of a predominantly black cast, something that has never been done. Another movie that really broke the mold in terms of casting is Crazy Rich Asians. According to Time magazine, “It’s the first modern story with an all-Asian cast and an Asian-American lead in 25 years” (Ho). It’s crazy to think that it took so long for another film cast like this to come along. As someone who identifies as white, I can turn on any movie or film and see myself, but other races don’t have that luxury and Hollywood is finally starting to be held accountable. Even though it may seem film and television are coming a long way due to successful releases such as these, there is still so much work to be done to make Hollywood truly diverse. If you look at how low the number of non-white actors in film are and then look at how successful films with diverse casts like this are, it doesn’t add up. These movies, along with many others, have shown just how successful films with diversity can be, so why is there such a low percentage of non-white actors in films?

?Another controversy pertaining to race that came to light in recent years was the debate of the Oscars and how only predominantly white actors were being nominated. This was commonly referred to as, #OscarsSoWhite. The movement was started in 2016 from a twitter hashtag by activist April Reign. Reign’s tweet would spark outrage from many fans and gain the attention of influential celebrities. Director Spike Lee opted out of the award ceremony stating, “How is it possible for the second consecutive year all 20 contenders under the acting category are white? And let’s not even get into the other branches” (Opam). It seemed that the Oscars had taken the criticism to heart when the 2017 award ceremony came around and many black men and women were nominated for their roles. However, in an interview with Reign discussing the progress, this is what she had to say:

Okay, so there wasn’t a slew of men and women of color. There [were] a lot of black people and Dev Patel. This is one of the issues I am dealing with on a regular basis. People say we got all these “diverse” nominees now, so #OscarsSoWhite must be done. But we don’t. We have films that reflect the black experience, but there weren’t any films that reflect the Latinx experience. We have cultural appropriation of the Asian-American and Pacific Islander community...There’s still a lot of work to be done (Opam).

It’s true, there is still a lot of work to be done. If Hollywood is going to be more diverse, they must represent everyone. As Reign said, there were no roles that represented the Latinx community. What about them? Is their story not as important?

?April Reign also said in her interview, “I’m still waiting on [a] romantic comedy from the LGBTQIA community” (Opam). What about the LGBTQIA community? Where are their stories? If you search on Netflix for LGBT films, there is only a handful, and most of them are awful and unrealistic. The GLADD report found that Hollywood is failing with LGBT characters in film. Only 12.8% of characters were represented as LGBT and 64% of that was specifically gay men (GLADD). Film has a long way to go in developing and showcasing the lives of the LGBT community. Television however, has taken a major step in representing the community. Many up and coming shows have feature LGBT characters that have shown realistic portrayals of gay characters. The GLADD report found that television has had a rise in LGBT stories and especially a rise in LGBT characters of color.

In the new show, The Chilling Adventures of Sabrina, creator Roberto Aguirre-Sacasa introduces a non-binary character and a pansexual character, two identities in the LGBT community that have had little to none representation. Not only did Aguirre-Sacasa create these roles, he also hired a non-binary actor, Lachlan Watson, to play a non-binary character, which is almost unheard of (Mason). Usually, straight actors will play LGBT characters. There is nothing wrong with a person playing a role that they don’t identify with, but it is still nice to see someone represent themselves and their character at the same time. The kind of representation this portrays to the audience can be helpful to so many people who identify the same way and can be a way for them finally see themselves represented on the screen.

?Many LGBT characters have been grossly exaggerated stereotypes. Many gay characters are never even shown in romantic relationships or as having families. A show that helped break this stereotype is Modern Family. Sure, you get the typical “feminine” gay man in Cam, but you also get a more well-rounded character in Mitchell. You also get a loving couple that people can see as just normal people like everyone else and not specifically as a person who is gay. The Hollywood Reporter ran a poll in 2012 showing that television shows like Modern Family were helping in the polls to make gay marriage supported in the USA. The study found that, “Though gay TV also makes some voters more intensely opposed to gay marriage, they are outnumbered by voters who become more supportive of gay marriage, influenced by what they see on TV” (Appelo). The kind of representation that a show like this provided helped people to see that we all have similarities no matter who we love. Imagine what wonders it would do to show representation of other LGBT communities in Hollywood as well? Maybe then, people would see that we are more similar than different.

?When discussing both race and sexuality in Hollywood, you can’t help but notice the under-representation of women in Hollywood. Out of both studies, the UCLA Diversity Report and the GLADD Report, an underlining theme is how little of these roles are portrayed by women. Despite both race and sexuality being important things to represent, where are the women in those scenarios? Many stories portray the struggles of men. Many female characters are used simply as background or as sidekicks or as damsels in distress that need to be saved.

?A film that comes to mind as a great masterpiece when it comes to a female character is, Legally Blonde. You have a bubbly blonde who is a sorority sister. She comes across as your typical feminine girl. She loves the color pink and she sports a tiny Chihuahua (this is very reminiscent of that time). The viewer is made to believe that, because she is blonde, and because she is feminine, she is not smart. However, she’s very smart and defies the stereotype by getting into a top law school and winning a major case. Now, this is just a film but imagine a young girl watching this movie and seeing how smart and clever this woman is and imagining that they can grow up to do the same. They can do and be anything they want, and they are strong enough to do it. Now imagine being that same young girl and only having women represented as second class to men. The only representation that is shown is that of a wife or a girlfriend, nothing more.

?Actress Geena Davis is working hard to bust the stereotypical role. In an interview with Forbes, she said, “That’s what media, entertainment, and advertising have tended to portray… Instead, the woman has often been the girlfriend or the wife of the lead character. This was sending a message to everyone in society that women had less value… What we are trying to do is have media representation better reflect reality” (Lee). Davis also made the analysis that, “In movies, male characters received twice as much screen time and spoke twice as often compared to female characters” (Lee). Most people do not consider this. It is easy to not see what is in front of you until someone points it out. Because women are so under developed in media, it makes the need for strong female roles that much more important.

?Someone who is breaking down these walls is actress and writer Lena Dunham. Dunham’s popular show Girls showcased the lives of 4 women in New York City. Every character had their own flaws and issues but were portrayed in a realistic way. Not one character was known as someone’s wife or girlfriend. Instead, each of them were trying to find their way in their careers, and even though relationships were discussed, they were not always the main focus. In a groundbreaking way, the female characters were portrayed as sexual beings and they expressed angst, something that has not always been shown. The New York Times praised Dunham’s accurate portrayal as, “redefining both female beauty and a woman’s value” (Scott). This show was a major step in equalizing the way women were portrayed compared to men and helped to show that a female’s journey was interesting and a story worth telling.

?The times have changed since the beginning of Hollywood. Women can lead a role not specifically pertaining to a relationship, a man and a woman are not the only type of relationship portrayed, and people of any race and background can play any role and have it still be a success. We’ve come a long way but there is still so much to do. White actors and characters are still the ones who dominate the industry, LGBT characters are still needed to represent the community as a whole, and women are still the least to be cast in leading roles. Progress continues to be made but it is not where it could be. With the knowledge of the issue, we can make Hollywood a more inclusive place.

Cite this page

The True Meaning of Being Created Equal

All throughout history, Americans have greatly struggled with the concept of equality. When you think about it, equality isn’t always equal in America. It was only a little less than two centuries ago that slavery was abolished and less than a single century ago when women were finally granted the right to vote. When it came down to it, nobody was valued more than a white male whether people will admit to it or not. Not only are women and colored people targets of this unfair balance of social structure, the LGBT community are on the bottom of the totem pole as well. Currently, a huge low blow has been served to the LGBT community as President Donald Trump is working on dismissing the recognition and protection of transgender men and women. The Trump Administration and Department of Human Health is trying to push the definition of gender as “either male or female, unchangeable, and determined by the genitals that a person is born with”. This completely strips the identity and dignity of 1.4 million Americans who are transgender. All of these instances of inequality leads people to question the true meaning of Thomas Jefferson's statement, “All men are created equal.” If women, colored people, and the LGBT community are not equals to the rest of the country, then what were the founding fathers really trying to say?

It is easy to come to the conclusion that when Jefferson was talking about being created equal, he was not talking about physical or mental stature and by events that took place throughout history, not by sex or race either. By just looking at several people when you are in a room, you can tell how uniquely different we all are. Some people are born with more advantages than others and some with some disadvantages. For example, a child born into a two parent home with a doctor’s income is more likely to have a more stable life than one born into a struggling single parent household who lives off of state benefits. Data from a study conducted by Melinda Kedro, a licensed childcare provider through the Colorado Department of Human Services, shows that children who come from a single parent home versus a two biological parent home are more susceptible to experiencing learning, mental, and social problems. In her study, she also notes that, “Exposure to single parenthood as a child also raises the probability of next generation single parenthood by approximately 120 percent.” This data shows that Jefferson clearly didn’t mean by being created equal. Everyone is born into different situations that can either help or deter them. This is where privilege comes into play and the equality scale is thrown completely off.

Although we are not all physically or mentally equal, the meaning of being created equal is much deeper than just the surface of the quote. We are all equal on one aspect of the spectrum though, and that is when it comes to self worth. Each person on this planet, despite age, race, sex, mental capacity, wealth, are of the same value as the person to their left and right. This idea of equal self worth can be traced back all the way to 3rd century B.C by Stoic Philosophers. Those Stoic ideas were then taken up in Christianity and the idea that we are all equal in the eyes of God, and that we all possess an equal soul started to spread.

On the topic of self value, Ann Landers once said, “Too many people today know the price of everything and the value of nothing.” In today’s society, people base others worth off of wealth and the material possessions one owns. It does not matter if you have one million in the bank or a penny to your name, we all possess the same value as people and all have the same soul size in the eyes of our creator. Physical items and possessions do not determine self worth and that was what Jefferson was trying to say in the Declaration of Independence of 1776.

When thinking of how we as Americans are created equal, it takes an open mind and a deep amount of thought to truly grasp the concept. By everyone possessing equal self worth by being human,we are all granted unalienable rights as well. These rights are also stated in the Declaration of Independence: the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. For example, my mother played D1 soccer on a full-ride at the University of Buffalo and my father played for the Detroit Tigers. My athletic ability per say, would probably be different from a child of two musicians. I’m all,we are all born with the same opportunity to do something great, even though our starting lines can be in different places in the marathon of life.

Cite this page

By Josiah Carr

Planning a wedding is stressful for almost any couple. But planning a gay wedding may add an extra layer of stress onto the planning of your special day. Being in Tennessee, couples may have to do additional research to determine if their venue, florist, caterer, etc. are LGBT+ friendly. Here are some tips for planning the ultimate gay wedding.

THE OUTFIT - If you are inviting friends and family from far and wide to attend your gay wedding, all of your guests will be highly anticipating what you will be wearing. I recommend finding a designer that celebrates the love that you two share. If you are shopping locally, I recommend working with the insanely talented Olia Zavozina. She works hand in hand with clients to design the outfits of their dreams. Whether you are looking for a pantsuit, a stunning gown with a cape, or a custom 3-piece suit, Olia can hook you up! 

INCLUDE THE CHILDREN - Growing up in the south as a gay male, I wasn’t around gay men and women growing up enough. I recently had the pleasure of planning a same-sex wedding here in Nashville. The families were sure to include the children to pass out programs and gave a few kids the honorable roles of ring bearer and flower girl. I think it’s important for our generation to encourage the next generation to see love, not confined to orientation or gender, but to truly see love universally.

A BANGIN’ PLAYLIST - If your guests are coming to your Gay Wedding, you better believe it’s important to show them a good time on the dance floor. Gaga, Ariana, Betty Who — let the anthems ring!

ALL CUSTOM EVERYTHING - I often encourage my clients to have at least one custom piece involved in their wedding. This could be the Altar piece, a piece of furniture, or even a small box that hold cards. It’s a way to have a special piece of your wedding to keep for years to come. I have had the pleasure of working with Syzygy Events based in DC to create custom pieces with my clients in the past. This company also loves and celebrates the LGBT community. 

THE HONEYMOON - There are several LGBT tourism agencies available throughout the country and around the world. These companies have partnered with hotels and restaurants globally that don’t tolerate the LGBT+ community but instead celebrate the community. I have worked with Pink Iceland to help plan an exciting getaway and would highly recommend Iceland for a quick 5-hour flight to another planet.

Cite this page

There are a range of answers when the role of a government is questioned. To put it simply, the government was created to enhance life. There are various ways the government must do in order to achieve this goal. It is through the resolution of disputes and the protection of lives, liberties, and property of individuals. There are laws put in place that protect people based on their sex, race, religion, and disability, but no clear protections for the gender identity and sexual orientation of people in all aspects of public life. To make sure that the law equally protects all civil rights, the Equality Act should be passed.

Analysis

The LGBT community are still being discriminated against in this day and age. One issue is employment discrimination. Although sexual orientation and gender identity do not have any relation to how one may perform in the workplace, the previous four decades has documented high levels of discrimination against lesbians, gay men, bisexuals and transgender people in the workplace (Mallory & Sears, 2011). In 2008 the GSS, a national probability survey representing the United States population, showed the of the Lesbian, Bisexual, and gay respondents, 27% had experienced at least a form of sexual orientation discrimination and 7% had lost a job during the five years before the survey, while 38% experienced at least one form of sexual discrimination among the ones who were open about their sexual orientation to their coworkers. More than a third of the respondents stated that they were not out to any of their coworkers. Transgender respondents reported an even higher percentage with 78% experiencing at least one form of harassment or mistreatment at work because of their gender identity(Mallory & Sears, 2011). It was also shown that the wages of gay men were lower than heterosexual men as well.

The second issue is housing discrimination. On top of sexual orientation and gender identity not being protected classes under the federal Fair Housing Act, in 28 states, it is legally allowed to deny housing(Graves, 2018). This is a concern to the LGBT community as they are more likely to be discriminated against when looking for a home to move in. They may be shown less homes/units. Others were not able to put both partners' names on a homeowner's insurance policy and or were refused claims by insurance companies because the owners are “unrelated”(Housing for LGBTQ+ People, 2018). The third issue to address is discrimination in health care. There is currently no federal legislation prohibiting healthcare discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity(You Don’t Want Second Best, 2018). Because of this, when an event does occur, LGBT people are left with little help in this situation. In a survey conducted by the Center for American Progress in 2017, reports that a healthcare provider had refused to see them because of their sexual orientation or gender identity were 8 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual respondents and 29 percent of transgender respondents as well as 9 percent of lesbian, gay, and bisexual respondents and 21 percent of transgender respondents saying a provider had used harsh or abusive language when they sought medical care(You Don’t Want Second Best, 2018). As it is proven here, discrimination against the LGBT is very much so still prevalent.

In order to protect the civil rights of the LGBT community, what needs to be implemented is the Equality Act. If the Equality Act were to be passed, it would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to prohibit discrimination in employment, housing, public accommodations, public education, federal funding, credit, and the jury system.on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. It would also prohibit discrimination in public spaces and services and federally funded programs such as retail stores, services such as banks and legal services, and transportation services. on the basis of sex as well (The Equality Act,2018). The passing of this act will largely benefit the LGBT community in many ways. With Trump in presidency, it is well know that his administration diminishes the efforts of equal rights for the LGBT people, asserting that this certain discrimination is lawful. Letting Congress know the change that needs to be done is important. The protection of these rights will lift the negative effects of discrimination against LGBT in the workplace in terms of job opportunities, mental health, pay, and job satisfaction as well as productivity. With this act in place, employers can no longer give a different wage pay to this marginalized group. More employers may begin to hire.

They would be getting the same amount of pay as they should be. The implementation of this act may let the LGBT people feel more safe to be themselves. In the survey above, it was mentioned that one third of the respondents were not openly comfortable about their sexual orientation. They may feel more comfortable after knowing that their civil rights are finally protected. Feeling safe in their on skin will make going to work more enjoyable. In terms of housing, they will be able to look for homes without any trouble or worrying that they may be denied housing due to their sexual orientation or gender identity. Last but not least, health care would be so much less complicated. The concerns of being discriminated against delay or even cause LGBT people to forego seeking medical care. With the Trump administration that tried advancing two regulatory changes, the act would stop it immediately.

In May 2017, the Department of Health and Human Services began rolling back the rule clarifying section 1557. This is the nondiscrimination provision of the Affordable Care Act which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability in certain health programs or activities(Section 1557 of the Patient Protection,2018). Rather than defending the rule in court, the Trump administration announced its plans to eliminate the clarification that sex discrimination includes discrimination based on gender identity. In April 2018, the court was notified that Trump’s administration had submitted a proposed rule to that effect to the White House for approval. Had this plan gone through, LGBT people would be less certain of their rights. The Equality Act will aid in no longer having to fear being turned away from doctors when they are in need of medical assistance. 

Cite this page

Sexual transmitted infections have affected our society to enhance their technology and improve medicine to better help those infected but as well as those who are are not infected. In particular, Chlamydia has had the highest diagnosed rate in bacterial sexual infections, affecting our young adults the most. Sexually transmitted infections are related to sociology, gender roles, health sciences and what medicine information is provided to our society. Furthermore, HIV plays a huge role in the LGBT community. LGBT stands for people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. It is known that the LGBT community is more diverse. In the US, homosexual men are 67 percent more likely to contract HIV than heterosexual men. Members of the homosexual (LGBT) community are at an increased risk of a number of health threats, including sexually transmitted diseases, compared to their heterosexual peers.

Though young women are the highest infected by Chlamydia, gender does not discriminate and it is one of the most diagnosed sexual bacterial infections in general and highly infects men as well. Like in women, men minorities, specifically African American and Hispanics, are at a higher risk to be infected but in particular homosexual men have more of a chance to get Chlamydia (Mizuno, Borkowf, Millett, Bingham, Ayala, & Stueve, 2012). Mayer stated “that anal sexual activity has a higher rate in sexual transmitted infections like Chlamydia,” this was correlated with homosexual men having a high infection rate (Mayer, Bekker, Stall, Grulich, Colfax, & Lama, 2012). Homosexuality was seen as a big factor in infections and diseases, it was later known that heterosexual couples are easily infected.

Health equity is a basic principle of public health. This states that all people have a right to health. Differences in the incidence and prevalence of health conditions and health status between groups are commonly referred to as health disparities. Most of these disparities are marginalized because of a variety of reasons. Sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, race and gender are a few examples. Unfortunately, LGBT community members are suffering greatly by these disparities. People in such groups/ communities not only experience worse health but also tend to have less access to the social determinants or conditions that support health. This discrimination has yielded the LGBT community to attain their full health potential and no one is disadvantaged from achieving this potential because of their social position or other socially determined circumstances. According to the CDC, “In 2014, adult males who identify as homosexual men were 50% less likely to have visited a doctor in past 12 months compared to those identified as heterosexual males. In 2016, homosexual men were approximately 1.3 times more likely to visit the emergency room in the past 12 months then heterosexual men.”

The health disparity has many consequences on the community and the individuals who suffer. The first is the impact that the doctor has towards homosexual individuals. LGBT patients find it difficult to disclose their sexual identity or preference to their doctor due to judgment. According to the Health Quality Index, “30% of LGBT adults do not seek health care service or attend a regular healthcare provider, compared to 10% of age-matched heterosexuals.” “In 2015 56% of LGBT adults and 70% of transgender individuals experience discrimination in health care setting. Other barriers are decreased access, lack of awareness and insensitivity to their unique health needs and inequitable health system policies and practices.

The root causes of this disparity can be summarized by differences in opinion as well as differences in sexual behavior. Those with a less progressive attitude towards multiple sexual partners are accounted for some of the disparities. These disparities are associated from social inequalities and the stigma that the LGBT population faces everyday. In addition to opinions by others, LGBT members have been victimized and experience violence at higher rates than the general population and acceptance or lack of acceptance by our families of origin impacts these individuals mental and physical health.

Another root cause would be historically discriminating policies affecting health behavior and individual behavior regarding cultural norms in the homosexual community. Discrimination against LGBT individuals and families in housing, employment, marriage, adoption, retirement and health insurance means that the playing field is uneven to start. Therefore, the LGBT community has faced many obstacles especially in healthcare and caring for themselves. The Health Equity Promotion Model is aimed to eliminate disparities in the homosexual population by considering more inclusive research oriented towards LGBT people. The model would promote heterogeneity and intersectionality within the community and would help to positively influence structural and environmental context on a global scale. According to The National Health Initiative, “the model highlights a heterogeneity and intersectionality within LGBT communities; the influence of structural and environmental context; and both health-promoting and adverse pathways that encompass behavioral, social, psychological, and biological processes. It also expands upon earlier conceptualizations of sexual minority health by integrating a life course development perspective within the health-promotion model. By explicating the important role of agency and resilience as well as the deleterious effect of social structures on health outcomes, it supports policy and social justice to advance health and well-being in these communities. Important directions for future research as well as implications for health-promotion interventions and policies are offered.” 

Cite this page

Through my observations, I have noticed that the music industry has helped shape our society to the way that it is now. It is always interesting to see how a specific song or artist can capture a nation with their art, and mold and shape the people with the words they preach. Songwriters take advantage of that fact by writing songs to prove a point or to make known something they are passionate about. Throughout history, songwriters have experimented with their songs by using modernistic and economic views to depart from past cultures (Powell, 15). Music can help humanity take a stand against current explosive problems including racism, LGBT rights, and rape and abuse. Depending on the times there have been different problems being addressed by the music industry. Things like alcohol, drugs, and addiction are often brought to awareness, but a specific topic has caught my attention. One theme in music that is not often spoken about is the influence of humanity on the environment. However, there was a time when this theme was more common. The 1960s and 1970s were the big boom of environmental care, and although it has gone down from there, there are still a few artists who speak about this huge problem. Today I will be talking about how the music industry draws attention to negative human impact on the environment.

“The environmental movement had taken root as far back as the nineteenth century, but it wasn’t until the middle of the twentieth that it truly began to flower. Environmental awareness built slowly but steadily throughout the fifties and sixties, and then all at once exploded in 1969 following a series of high-profile environmental disasters… Ecologists who had for years been fighting to get their concerns about the environment into the national spotlight suddenly found their voices being heard” (Glenn, First Earth Day). Environmentalism in music began in the 1960s and 1970s. This was the era of the hippie movement. It was a post war era when society was tragedy stricken and sick of the hatred of war. Love was the focus of the era, and because the environment was being trashed from the war and pollution was piling up, the issue of the environment was a focus too.

There were definitely many environmental problems that happened in this era as well. Specifically, there was smog that covered Los Angeles and New York City from all of the cars on the roads. This caused an increase in respiratory illnesses and drew the country’s attention to the air quality problem. Secondly, the Santa Barbara disaster occured. In this case, a union oil drilling company spilled 100,000 barrels of crude oil into the ocean. All of the wildlife this killed washed up onto residential beaches. DDT insecticide was an awful problem as well. Although it is now banned, it was used on crops to keep away pests. However, birds would eat the infected insects. This would cause the birds to lay brittle eggs, which ultimately put many species of birds in danger. Also, the Cuyahoga River was being used as a waste ground due to lack of good sewage disposal. The waste mixed with the oil from the spill and caused a huge fire when the sparks from a passing train landed upon it.

These monumental events in history left their mark on the earth. The world was changing, and so was the culture. Civil rights were becoming an argument. Subjects like racism, segregation, and women’s rights were being fought for. The Vietnam War was beginning, which meant the drafting of soldiers. This sparked the hippie, or in other words, the anti war movement. The culture of the youth of America was changing drastically from that of their elders and the earlier generations. The mindset was changing to a peace and love attitude rather than war. Rock and roll was becoming part of the popular culture, and spirituality and liberal arts were evolving and growing in popularity. These explorations in new ideas and these realizations lead to drastic changes in the course that the earth was headed.

These changes started the idea of having pro environmental movements. Give Earth A Chance was the movement that began in Michigan during the Vietnam War. Give Peace a Chance was already a movement formed by the Hippies of the time, so Give Earth a Chance was the perfect name, as it was already popular. Buttons were made and the popularity grew, and eventually, by spring of 1970, the first annual Earth Day was celebrated (Rome, 525).

New Left was a political movement of the time as well. This group focused on civil rights, and many other human rights, and very strongly on environmentalism. Historians believe that this movement was the real stem of environmental movements.

The human race was realizing that pollution and progress did not have to coincide like it had formerly done. They saw that the new agricultural enhancements, synthetic materials, and power sources came with harsher environmental impact”(Laitala, 50). This was when the music industry decided to step in and attempt to make known this issue widely. Several artists, including Joni Mitchell, wrote strongly opinionated songs to prove their point.

Joni Mitchell was an environmental activist and a singer songwriter. She won eight Grammy awards for her work that she began at age 9. Mitchell writes about emotional information: who controls it, and how it is squandered or hoarded, withheld or weaponized” (Chiasson, 1). She was, and still is, known as the “ultimate earth goddess” (Monk, 37). Although technically she was not part of any specific environmental movements, she often used her music to draw awareness to the problem of the human impact on the environment.

“Big Yellow Taxi”, by Joni Mitchell is a perfect example of how songs can be used to impact the environment. This song was written about Hawaii. Joni Mitchell was on a vacation and she wanted to look at the mountains. She looked out of the window from her hotel that was supposed to have a Mountain View, and instead what she saw was a giant parking lot. In the song she says the lyrics “they took all the trees and put them in a tree museum and they charged all the people a dollar and a half just to see them” (Mitchell, Taxi). In this line she was talking about the Foster Gardens of Hawaii. The Foster Gardens are a Makiki tree museum. She was also talking about the Redwood Forests, and drawing attention to the fact that soon, she believed, trees would only be in museums. She also uses the lyrics: “Hey farmer farmer. Put away that DDT now, give me spots on my apples but leave me the birds and the bees” (Mitchell, Taxi). These lyrics were drawing attention to the awful problem of the DDT insecticides formerly discussed that were killing the birds and the bees at this time. This insecticide eventually was banned, probably thanks to the negative attention Joni Mitchell attracted to it. As stated by Calder in an article, “ according to an interview she [Mitchell] did in the late '90s with the LA Times, some parking lots have been turned into parks because of her song! It's a fantastic example of a great Canadian song that uses music for a positive message” (cbcmusic.ca).

Sadly, after the 60s and 70s, environmentalism became less popular. Humanity grew selfish and they cared more about selfish things than the planet. “Regardless of the success of green movements to raise public concern and affect government policy… in the; developing world little has been achieved” (Powell, 15). That’s when things begin going downhill.

After a long lull in environmentalism, Michael Jackson made a comeback. Although Michael Jackson was not primarily famous for his role in environmentalism, people may not know how large of a role he actually played. After Jackson’s death, his sister wanted him to be remembered as a humanitarian and a contributor to scientific advances in the treatment of HIV aids and global food security (Murphey, King and Environmentalist). His song, Earth Song, made a huge impact on America and brought people to more of a realization. In an interview, Michael Jackson said, “This is Earth’s song, because I think nature is trying so hard to compensate of man’s mismanagement of the Earth” (Murphey, King and Environmentalist).

Earth song, written in 1995, was a very important song to Michael Jackson.

“I remember writing 'Earth Song' when I was in Austria, in a hotel. And I was feeling so much pain and so much suffering of the plight of the Planet Earth. And for me, this is Earth's Song, because I think nature is trying so hard to compensate for man's mismanagement of the Earth. And with the ecological unbalance going on, and a lot of the problems in the environment, I think earth feels the pain, and she has wounds, and it's about some of the joys of the planet as well. But this is my chance to pretty much let people hear the voice of the planet. And this is 'Earth Song.' And that's what inspired it. And it just suddenly dropped into my lap when I was on tour in Austria.' (Wiser, Songfacts).

In the music video for ‘Earth Song’, there is a scene in the Amazon showing deforestation, a town destroyed by a battle in Croatia, and the poaching of animals in Tanzania. This was a shock to America at the time when it came out. Out of this song came the birth of a new age of environmentalism in some Americans, but sadly, the hype did not last long or spread too wide in America. The song was much more popular in the United Kingdom (Murphey, King and Environmentalist).

After this small hype died down, America went back to it’s selfish state. We are still in the state, but there is one specific artist who is actively working to make a change currently.

Jack Johnson is using his platform to make a change in America’s outlook on the earth. He is a major environmentalist. He reaches many people through his concerts and popularity. He knows that people travel to his shows from far distances, creating lots of carbon emissions. He tries to make his shows more eco-friendly to eliminate some of the harsh affects his concerts can have on the environment. Jack Johnson travels in a van rather than a bus. In an interview, Johnson said,

“We started getting the message out of ways that people can be creative to get to the shows,” he explains. “Take mass transit, ride their bikes, or carpooling. Any way you can cut down on the amount of vehicles…because 80-90% of emissions come from people traveling to the shows. We have a bike valet at all of our shows. Every time we come around it gets more popular and it gets attention in the local news!” (Ferreiro, Johnson Interview).

Jack Johnson obviously cares deeply for the environment. Although all of the environment is obviously important to him, his home, Hawaii, is extra important to him. He wants these islands to be preserved.

“Also high on Johnson's priorities is his dedication to the environment, in particular to preserving the natural beauty of the Hawaiian Islands. In 2003, he and Kim founded the Kokua Hawaii Foundation to support environmental education in schools. When Johnson performs in school gymnasiums, armed with his songs for the 2006 Curious George soundtrack (which features green-friendly tracks like 'The 3 R's,' about recycling), madness ensues. ‘We don't even have a curbside recycling program in Hawaii,’ says Mark Cunningham, a North Shore lifeguard and longtime friend. ‘Convincing adults to lobby down at the state capital is an exercise in futility. So Jack and Kim say, 'Hey, let's brainwash the kids,' but in a sincere and logical way. It's this incredible awareness they're raising in a generation of school kids.’” (Scaggs, Dude Abides).

Only energy-efficient bulbs are used at Jack Johnson concerts and recording studio. “Johnson and his three-piece band -- bassist Merlo Podlewski, drummer Adam Topol and pianist Zach Gill -- laid down Static in Johnson's new studio, the Solar Powered Plastic Plant. It's tucked in the back of a house in Los Angeles that is the base for Johnson's label, “Brush fire Records.” (Scaggs, Dude Abides). He carries around filtered water dispensers to reduce plastic bottles. He encourages people to bring reusable glasses to fill with water. Jackie Johnson donated 100% profits from his tours from 2008 to 2013 to nonprofit organizations to the Johnson Ohana charitable foundation, in effort to help not only the environment, but also the human race (Scaggs, Dude Abides). He doesn’t only want to protect the environment with his life, but he wants to inspire others to do the same. He makes it easier for Americans who see his shows to be kind to this earth.

The song “The Three R’s” by Jack Johnson is a great example of Jack Johnson‘s mission to affect the planet for good, even though it is intended for kids. In this song, he teaches the three R’s: reduce, reuse, recycle. He gives examples of each ‘R,’ and instructs kids to take care of the earth in simple ways, such as using reusable bags at the store, sharing clothes with their siblings when they outgrow them, and recycling things that cannot be reused.

It is clear to see that the three of these songs have inspired the human race. “Big Yellow Taxi” inspires people to stand up against negative environmental activity and it draws attention to the problem in a very clear coated way. “Earth Song” challenges people to change their ways and opens eyes to what is really happening in the world. It clearly depicts the evil going on towards the earth. “The Three R’s” by Jack Johnson encourages the next generations to use less plastic and reduce waste, even if their parents are not teaching them that.

In conclusion, music can be used to influence the nation. Certain artist have used their platform to inform about the negative impacts of humans on nature. Although it does not solve the problem, it draws attention, and that is always the first step.

Cite this page

As Christina Du Toit (2016) states in the beginning of his book on Brand Activism, “It’s easy to portray corporations as evil. After all, it doesn’t take much digging to find countless examples of companies that have perpetrated massive fraud in order to enrich a few at the expense of many. The financial meltdown of 2008 showed that there are no limits to human greed.” That said, it can be understandable how shifting public opinion towards showcasing the good deeds of corporations can be a hard task to achieve, given that the public is normally geared towards focusing on what is being done wrong rather than the opposite, especially when the stage is set for corporations to be the bad guy of the plot. However, corporations and brands now have a chance to be on the right side of history, by taking a social stand and making a difference, brands are not only repositioning themselves towards achieving a greater objective than just catering to people’s basic needs, they are also catering to their inherent and evolving need to do business with brands that have a purpose and not just a functional benefit. Du Toit (2016) raises a valid point about the expectations of a new generation; a generation that expects “a brand to have purpose that transcends being just a product, a purpose that is reflected in the people and the culture.” That is why, even brands and corporations that are inherently viewed in a negative light are seeking to tell a positive, perhaps for the first time in their history.

Public skepticism however is ever more prominent and reflected in this new generation of consumers. “Contradictions are inevitable here. Activism as consumerism. Celebrity humanitarianism. Commodity-driven social resistance. Neoliberal activism. Yet, perhaps the most important insight […] is that seeing it all as contradiction does not help us anymore, that a sense of contradiction is derived from remaining in an outdated mode of thinking. We cannot dismiss these modes as simply hypocrisy, incorporation, or corporate appropriation. They demand a more complex, less cynical, less dismissive approach. Indeed, these very practices of consumer activism demand a recognition of the key relationship of consumerism and affect, the emotional content of consumer transactions. They thus demand new models for taking the emotional effects of consumer transactions seriously rather than seeing them as uncritical and acquiescent.”

According to Banet-Weiser and Mukherjee (2018), the need to do good in today’s consumerist society means that both brand and consumer want to stand for something. “Part of the discourse of contemporary neoliberal capital, then, is the notion that profit is achieved not by ruthless, inhumane practices or by unrestrained avarice but, rather, by both the corporation and the consumer acting “virtuously.””

- The new age of marketing, shift focus on humankind & activism and the importance of putting people first (not consumers) “Creativity has the power to transform human behavior”

- Marketing 3.0 is about people, not consumers (more from Marketing 3.0 book)

- A skeptical audience (brands need to pay extra attention on their stances, activism campaign execution and chosen endorsers; to solidify credibility)

- Difference between CSR and Brand Activism

How does social purpose differ from CSR?

Social purpose has to be relevant to the company’s core business. All companies have to think about how to engage radically with society.

This means engaging with stakeholders on their agenda and adapting your business strategy accordingly.

The strategy should not just think about the supply chain or sourcing; it also needs to relate to all the people you interact with, both inside the company and outside of it.

Definitions:

What is branding? A company brand is at once definable — the American Marketing Association defines it as a “name, term, design, symbol, or any other feature that identifies one seller's good or service as distinct from those of other sellers,', and at other times it is something else . . . not completely definable. As Jeff Bezos, Founder of Amazon, says: “Branding is what people say about you when you’re not in the room.”

What is activism? “Activism consists of efforts to promote, impede, or direct social, political, economic, and/or environmental reform or stasis with the desire to make improvements in society. Forms of activism range from writing letters to newspapers or to politicians, political campaigning, and economic activism such as boycotts or preferentially patronizing businesses, rallies, street marches, strikes, sit-ins, and hunger strikes.”

How do branding and activism work together then? Brand activism is synonyms with the social purpose of a brand, and is generally done through advertising campaigns that position this purpose as the activist mantra of a brand.

Understanding how brand activism works

Kotler & Sarkar (2017) established a framework to aid brands in developing activist strategies, stating that activism does not need to be, and was not always, progressive.

Activism has unfortunately taken many regressive turns in previous years and continues to do so. The two main examples of regressive activism are Big Pharma & Big Tobacco, with the later lobbying governments for years on end (and until this day) towards loosening the sanctions on tobacco products, claiming first that cigarettes were even healthy despite what their own research conveyed.

“On the progressive activism side, we see more and more companies seeking to have an impact on the biggest societal problems. These companies have a larger purpose than simple profit-seeking, and are increasingly seen as leaders in their fields.”; “Brand activism emerges as a values-driven agenda for companies that care about the future of society and the planet’s health. The underlying force for progress is a sense of justice and fairness for all.”

Brand activism: A trend or an answer to the demands of a generation?

According to a report by Havas (2016), people are feeling deeply dissatisfied with the present and ambivalent about the future. While consumers are embracing all the new technologies and conveniences that are so much a part of the modern lifestyle, they are also wistful about those aspects of life—including simplicity, intellectuality, and strong ties to nature’s rhythms—that are slipping away. There is a growing sense that we need to take some time, individually and as a society, to think about the direction in which we are moving and whether we are going to be happy with where we end up. Many are questioning whether we can put the brakes on our current dizzying rate of “progress” and find a better, healthier, more satisfying way in which to move forward.

The report states that an average of 86% of interviewees believe that “in many ways, society is moving in the wrong direction”. The same percentage also agree that “change is good” but less than 40% of people worldwide trust their government and only 27% believe their government will be the greatest agent of change. Yet, people fear they cannot bring about to change alone, which is why they expect corporations to do their part. 84% believe that “companies have the responsibility to do more than just generate profit”. The younger the interviewees, the more they believe that companies have a duty to do better, which means that Brand Activism is not only “a nice to have” but a standard that consumers believe they should abide by.

This is especially reflected in the Millennial & Z Generations, according to another report by Havas (2011), “it is time to dismiss the notion of disengaged youth. Contrary to outdated stereotypes of youth apathy, this study reveals a generation intent on creating meaningful change—only through social media and pragmatic day-to-day consumer actions rather than violent revolution or traditional political channels. This is a generation made powerful not just by their sheer numbers but by their abiding sense of personal responsibility to their communities and world, their knowledge of global issues, and their fluency with tools—especially social media—that allow them to act individually and also to join together to effect positive change. For brands, it is essential to understand young people’s views and have the foresight to engage with them in genuinely meaningful ways”. Millennials are realistic, but still hopeful. They are keenly aware of the issues we all face and will continue to face, with most believing the world will be more dangerous, less peaceful, and more polluted in 20 years. But that hasn’t made them cynical. Nearly all millennials surveyed believe their generation has the power to change the world. And power for this generation is not necessarily about wealth and celebrity. Today’s heroes are individuals who have broken through the data glut and societal inertia to help others and push for change. Their role models are people like TOMS Shoes founder Blake Mycoskie and pro-democracy activist Wael Ghonim.

In-depth understanding of brand activism can be defined as a ‘rapport’ between a brand and its core consumers, driven by undertaken efforts to change attitudes and perceptions, build trust, and loyalty, and generate long-term sustainable engagement. Beyond the answer to the demands of a generation and the implied profits from it, it is also a proven way to generate solid brand loyalty. Following a report by JWT’s Intelligence unit on the future of loyalty (2016), the key concept is “emotional loyalty” rather than “transactional” loyalty. “We get bombarded with so many commercial messages and discounts and coupons and vouchers, so much is about the transactional stuff – it’s about price, or its about location, it’s about product.” Says Roberts, whose firm has implemented in-store loyalty schemes for retailers such as Lidl and Co-op in Europe. He adds that, when shoppers are asked about what drives emotional loyalty, they respond that the two big drivers are “the in-instore experience – is it nice, is it better, is it friendlier? And how much the retailer cares. Not just about the individuals as shoppers, but also do they care what they’re eating, do they care about the environment, do they care about the suppliers, about the employees? So there is a real emotional driver to loyalty”. That said, the overall activity scope of a company or brand, its shared values, mission statement, long-term vision as well as sustainability efforts, are likely to define its perception by prospective consumers, and will therefore drive loyalty and build viable trust. The key operating traits of a brand, coupled with its concrete actions towards society, communities where it operates, the environment, as well as the overall well-being of our planet, will largely affect the way consumers perceive it. Furthermore, in increasingly ‘aware’ societies and consumer bases, it is also likely that the latter will observe a brand’s practices across the entirety of its supply and/or value chain, from the manufacturer all the way to the consumer.

Brand Activism Categories

Brand Activism topics can be categorized into six categories as per Kotler and Sarkar (2017):

• Social activism includes areas such as equality and societal rights, such as gender activism, LGBT rights, racial diversity, etc. It also includes developmental and communal issues such as the right education, economic growth, women’s rights for decent work and equal pay, to name a few.

• Legal activism deals with the laws and policies that impact companies, such as taxation, workplace, and employment laws.

• Business activism is about governance – corporate organization, CEO pay, worker compensation, syndicates, organized associations, labor and union relations, etc.

• Economic activism may include minimum wage and tax policies that impact income equality and redistribution of wealth.

• Political activism covers lobbying, voting, voting rights, and policy making in general (gerrymandering, campaign finance, etc).

• Environmental activism deals with conservation, environmental, land-use, air and water pollution laws and policies, as well as relevant issues such as waste management, preservation of biodiversity, waste management, etc.

For the sake of this study, we will mainly focus on social activism examples as they have been prevalent in resent advertising campaigns.

1. Same-Sex Marriage

a. Negative Example: Chick-Fil-A

The COO of Chick-Fil-A, Dan Cathy, made derogatory comments towards same-sex marriage, suggesting the wrath of God would all those supporting gay marriage.

On such topics, with millennials identifying with consistently more liberal norms, it is not of wise business sense to involve personal opinions in company policies, noting that a CEO is regarded as the frontline of any given company – therefore, any words and opinions linked to him will be automatically mirrored to the company he represents, triggering boycotts and protests against said company.

Following a poll by Du Toit (2016); where even conservatives would agree to support same sex-marriage, proves that the stance Chick-Fil-A took makes little business sense, not only excluding liberals but also swaying conservatives as their current & potential customers. “With over 93% supporting legalized gay marriage, it isn’t hard for companies to adopt popular opinion.”, also confirming that same-sex marriage is an easy and low risk stance to adopt in the US, probably the reason why so many brands have done so, with various levels of success.

“Activism is about enabling change, even the type of change you may not want to support”, which is something Dan Cathy has failed to understand prior to his statements. The role of brands in shaping societal norms, i.e. acceptance of same-sex marriage, has become a reality. As the author mentions: “It is likely however that Corporate Activism, […] has helped shape the notion that gay marriage is not only legal but a social norm, much like a “traditional” marriage”

b. Negative Example: Barilla

The President of Barilla, Guido Barilla, said on live radio that he would not consider featuring same-sex couples in the brand’s ads, as it being a family company, he prefers the portrayal of a “traditional family”.

Again, such comments from a high-management figure cannot but be projected onto the company and brand he represents, noting that in the case of Barilla, as a family business, and with a president going by the same last name as the brand, the words could as well have been uttered in a TV ad. Twitter was on fire with tweets such as “As a family and future oriented father I will ask my wife and 2 kids to trash any product related to your brand”, and images being shared on social media with Barilla products and alternative slogans: “Would you like some homophobia with that?” (image featuring the Barilla logo, bowtie pasta, and in the same style as original Barilla ads). Barilla did try to do damage control after the public outcry (explain steps they undertook).

The alternative to accepting a social movement, or staying silent, is to publicly show displeasure, similarly to Chick-Fil-A and Barilla, which as we have seen creates high dissonance & negative reactions. Both companies endured the ill-devised statements of their respective management figures, though the two companies have not themselves taken a hostile stance with regards to the sensitive topics in question. However, what is even more interesting is to look at companies who loudly take a stand (for or against) a social issue and who launch awareness campaigns willing to take a public position on a controversy. This after all is a far greater form of brand activism than merely trying to do damage control. The difference here is that the former case is merely a traditional reaction, or what we call crisis management, whereas the latter is a form of self-initiated activism with unknown risks.

c. Positive Example: Stolichnaya

The company’s CEO took a public and blunt stand, at great personal risk, against the Russian (and Putin’s) government’s stance opposing same-sex marriage. (give more background on the established anti-gay laws).

Because of these laws, Western activists initiated a “Dump Russian Vodka” campaign, which was relatively impactful in boycotting Russian vodka. Stolichnaya’s CEO’s answer was heartfelt and very public, with a statement which was featured on the brand’s website: “Stolichnaya Premium vodka stands strong & proud with the global LGBT community against the attitude and actions of the Russian Government.” which went against the limited freedom of expression in Russia, particularly when it comes to criticizing the Russian government.

The actions of Stolichnaya were openly supportive of a controversial cause, turning them into a symbol of daring brand activism in a place where not many risked to verbalize such strong opinions, especially by linking them to their brand to suffer the potential consequences.

2. Diversity

a. Nike Example

In his Brand Activism book, Du Toit (2016) takes Nike as the prime example on the issue of racial & cultural diversity on a brand level. Nike supports the latter directly through its mission statement that is of unequivocal inclusion. “If you have a body, you are an athlete”, Nike co-founder, Bill Bowerman, once said these iconic words, and the company has stood by them in everything they’ve done, we can see it in their marketing, in their design, in the apps and devices they make.

“We are a company committed to diversity, inclusion and unleashing human potential . . . Nike believes if you have a body you are an athlete and we’re delighted it is becoming a call-to-action for all athletes to be their most authentic selves.”

b. The Bathroom Bill

As Du Toit (2016) reminds us, “Late February 2016, the city of Charlotte passed an ordinance expanding North Carolina’s anti-discrimination laws so that LGBT people would also be granted protection in places of “public accommodation” — part of this ordinance would allow transgender people to use the bathrooms of the gender they identify as.” However, the Republican Party backed by the state governor, blocked that ordinance by issuing a counter bill, House Bill 2, and having it voted the same day effectively banning people from using public bathrooms that do not correspond to their biological sex, while also discouraging other cities from passing future anti-discrimination ordinances to protect transgender people. In response, 80 CEOs such as Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg, Apple’s Tim Cook, Pfizer’s Charles Hill, and Google’s Sundar Pichai, co-signed a letter calling on the Governor to repeal these discriminatory provisions. They also reacted by pulling their support for the state and halting the opening of several of their new offices therein, effectively impeding the opening of thousands of new jobs that would have benefited the local economy, while stating that they do not wish to have their staff work in an environment where they are not all equal in the eyes of the law. Following this stance, numerous activities, including celebrities, decided to follow suit by either issuing public statements or even cancelling any activities (mainly concerts) they were planning on undertaking in those cities.

Both Nike’s mission statement, and the corporate reaction to the Bathroom Bill put forth inclusion efforts of multinational companies through the stated position of their top management acting as the mouth-piece of the company and what it stands for, be it by integrating it into their brand DNA & campaign (such as Nike), or by incorporating it into its trade & logistics management by taking an activist stance against a government issued effort to undermine a minority (opposition to bathroom bill).

Cite this page

Art and Fear is a book that looks to describe problems artists have in the creative process and give advice on how to overcome it. The author outlines two types of obstacles which are internal obstacles and external obstacles. Internal obstacles look into the idea of fear within an artists about their work, originality and how other view their art. External obstacles look into practice ideas within the art world like time management, production, the art community, teaching and the art network. One concept I found very interesting in this book dealt with the internal fear of others. The book looks at how deeply personal art can be and looks at how that effects an artist in being accepted by others. Personally, I think I resonate strongly with the fear of others especially when making personal art. Specifically I think that my fear of others as an artist’s pushes me to pursue less personal issues of comedy and humor. The book describes how art is expected to be intimate and in so reveal a certain amount about your personal feelings and opinions. This causes fear in artists because the people who view your intimate pieces form judgments about you that may or may not be correct. Another concept that stuck with me was the idea of pretending to be an artist. The book talks about the idea that many important artists seem like they know what they are doing and know their art is good. This intern causes artists like me to feel we aren’t creating real art because we are still learning and using influences to create. The last concept that I think is important for any artist to remember is artmaking involves skills that can be learned. The book talks about our perception of artmaking as something you are born with or that is innately apart of the artist. While some might be born with certain skills that help them in their art, the majority of artists have to go through the process of learning to achieve the art they want. It is important to remember art is a practice and like any practice you get better the more you try. Artists are constantly getting discouraged because art is seen as a gift. As one thinks of art more as a practice the less discouraged they will be and the more inspired they will become to practice to get to that level.

Researching Charlie Kaufman brought up some interesting facts and opinions about his creative process. Kaufman is most known as an American screenwriter, producer and director. He has written films such as Being John Malkovich, Adaptation, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Synecdoche. Two of his films that bring out much of his style and influences are Being John Malkovich and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. Kaufman created the story of this film first by just thinking about the idea of a married man falling in love with someone who isn’t his wife. The plot essentially follows a guy named Craig as he discovers a portal into john Malkovich head and peruses a co-worker named Maxine because he is falling in love with her. Craig’s wife Lotte also is told about the portal and begins to fall in love with Maxine as well. The storyline and style deals with many common themes Kaufman works with in his writing. Those films being life, morality, love through a different version of reality. Kaufman’s use of a reality or world that is different such as being able to go into a portal to john Malkoviches head, create the ability for his characters to reveal aspects of human beings that many people relate to or feel through alternate and fiction narratives. Eternal Sunshine of the spotless mind has much of the same style and themes within it. The story essentially follows Joel as he undergoes a procedure to erase the memory of Clemintine whom he loved because he is heartbroken. The story is similar in that it looks at a different reality where erasing memories is possible to reveal aspects of human behavior and feelings that many people go through. The story was similarly conceived by a simple idea from Michel Gondry and Pierre Bismuth looking at what would happen if one had the ability to erase memories about another person. It also similarly looks at the ideas of love, morality and the meaning of life through a different reality.

I also researched Sophia Coppola which also proved interesting because I previously knew little about her. Coppola comes from a family of filmmaker most notably her father Fransices Ford Coppola. Sophia Coppola got started in film making by acting, modeling and designing. She sites these three backgrounds as having some major influence in her work through the fashion and design aesthetic she creates in her films. Her works, included films like The Virgin Suicides, Los tin Translation, Marie Antoinette, Somewhere, The Bling Ring, A Very Murray Christmas and The Beguiled. She has also helped create music videos commercials as well as an acting career in small parts in movies like The Godfather, the Cotton Club and Star Wars. The two works of hers I found most interesting were Mary Antoinette and The Beguiled which both show some of her style and methods. Marie Antoinette is a historical drama film that follows the life of Marie Antoinette as she matures leading up to the French revolution. This film won an academy award for costume design which shows Coppolas fashion influences. The film also deals with concepts of youth and specifically girl youth and maturity. These concepts lead to another one of Coppolas influences of femininity and her drive to create films that she thinks a younger demographic of girls would want to see. The Beguiled also shows Coppolas influences of femininity. The film looks at the story of an school teacher during the civil war who helps a wounded union army soldier recover from a leg wound and falls in love while hidding him from the Confederate Army. Coppala wanted to outline and show all the ways women were traditionally raised to be there to care for a man. She was inspired by the narrative of Gone with the Wind but wanted to explore the narrative in a different era.

The three documentaries I watched were The Power of Nightmares, The Times of Harvey Milk and Kate Plays Christine. I found each one had different aspects that created an interesting story but also had some similarities between them. The Power of Nightmares had a very interesting way of telling a story through mainly archival footage and narration. There were many aspect of the archival footage that created messages the viewer pieced together without a narration. It can be hard for a visual with no narration to tell story but many times in this documentary visual footage was used with no narration to drive a point home. The narrative also was told in a way that gives the viewers a sense of parallels between what occurs in the middle east and what occurs in the United States. Both the Muslim Brotherhood and the Neo-conservative movement, had this idea that their society was becoming to individualistic and materialistic. Both sides believed that their society must unite together and focus more on community than individualism to stop society from “rotting away.” The Power of Nightmares has a strong ability to switch between these two countries to show how this thinking manifested inside the minds of different groups of people. It created a narrative that simply put focused on the power of words and ideas and their ability to shape, deceive and transform not only our society but the world. The Times of Harvey Milk also had very strong messages about our society and issues we face still to this day. This film outlined the life of Harvey Milk and how he was able to forefront the fight not only for LGBT rights but the rights of all minorities in San Francisco in the 1970’s. This film was interesting in its ability to tell an emotional story about the struggle for human rights. The films use of interviews with people who worked with Milk or knew him gave the viewer an inside view to his life as well as an inside view to what many LGBT community members in society were feeling. The conversation that happens between these two films is one of empathy and apathy within society. Both films look at historical events that were caused because of the worry that our country or society was headed in the wrong direction. They both look at how a group of people come together to create and idea for how they believe society should function and what must happen for society to get back on track. The films differ in that one looks at the idea that deception is a necessary tactic to create a universal and more connected society. The Times of Harvey Milk looks at the idea of openness to combat deceptive ideas to create an universal and connected acceptance of all people. Specifically, The times of Harvey Milk shows how a group of people started to create a more connected and accepting society through openness and breaking down serotypes. The Power of Nightmares shows how a group of people were able to create a more connected society based on false facts and deception.

For the 4 websites, I researched I felt like each one had a different aspect of interesting information and tools I can use in the future. When researching these websites I looked at how each one might be able to help be gain influences or inspiration in my own projects. Creative Mornings was an interesting website that gave that I want to use to just further learn about the creative community and learn more about design. Being a media design major, I think that creative mornings has a lot of good talks on design. One thing I found helpful is they have a section called skills that showcases videos teaching people certain skills. I particularly liked the videos on typography design because it is an area that I’m interested. The next website called nofilmschool, I think can help me in my video and film interests. One thing I particularly liked about this website was the articles about simple or cheaper easy to achieve and aesthetic effect in your videos such as cinematic lighting. Being a college student quality and cost is always in my mind when creating video works. This is a good resource for getting better quality while not increasing the cost by a significant amount. Researching this website also made me think more about my interest in video. Film and video work is known as being costly along with requiring a large amount of people and equipment to produce. Many student filmmakers are intimidated by the myth that it takes a lot of money and a lot of people. However, after looking at this website I think that with some simple tricks students can create films that don’t cost a lot and that they can be proud of. For the New York Times op doc and Music Videos on Vimeo, I primarily focused on looking at researching these websites as a tool for influence rather than technical abilities. I especially think that music videos can be a good influence for a film make in terms of effects, angles and camera movements. Music influences the way the video will look and many times prompts the use of different effects, angles or movements. Using a website like vimeo to look at these effects can be helpful not only for ideas but to try and emulate the movements to improve technical skills. The New York times op doc I think can be helpful to gain more inspiration and examples of good content or interesting subject matter. This website has a lot of great videos that focuses on the storyline rather than the effects like in music videos. Looking at the subject matter they tackle and the way they tell the narrative can be a good way for artists to develop ideas of stories as well as develop their narrative style.

Researching is extremely important especially for a creative trying to go into the field. It gives the create the ability to learn about famous or important pieces of work they may not have ever seen otherwise. I think for students especially it is important to learn about major works and artists to further your creativity. Many people like myself learn from emulating someone they enjoy or creating works that may be similar to their favorite artist. Emulating inspirations can be a very important thing for students to learn not only technical skills but how to create their own ideas or themes they wish to work with. However, I do think that to be a creative there must be some sort of initiative within the person to research on their own and not because they are required to by class. I also think that being required to choose from a designed list of artists, films, websites and reading can help creatives. It helps creatives because it gives them a list of resources that they may not have found on their own. For researching there have been a few things I have found that I might want to incorporate into my creative practice. I was interested in how Kaufman used different realizes and visions of the world to drive home a message that I so universal and that everyone goes through. I have the tendency to think of how I can tell the story in a straight forward manner. I would like to incorporate using different scenarios or reality’s to still give a message and not tell it in such a straightforward manner. After reading Art and Fear, I would also like to become more personal with my artistic practices. I tend to take a safer and less reveling approach to many of my projects and think that I could further my creative abilities if I take more risks create pieces that are more personal to me. 

Cite this page

Discuss the current corporate strategy which has been formulated and implemented by your selected firm.

With the expansion of technology, AB InBev is taking advantage by using it to have better engagement with their consumers. The company are scaling their current technology that use to analyze data, analytics, automation AI and exploring emerging technologies with block chain and VR (ABInBev, 2019). With the following strategy of emerging to new technology allow the company to have better access to the wants and needs of the consumers and help create new occasions and experiences, and help the rapid growth of beer by category.

Another current corporate strategy that AB InBev use is the creation of ZX Ventures. ZX Ventures is the company’s global growth and innovation team, which was launched in 2015. The team generate new products, launch, and provide a customer the ability to create their own drink of the comfort of their home (ABInBev, 2019). The team goal is to create new products and businesses that cater to the consumer needs. By creating this team provides the company to stay ahead of the curve that allow the corporation to come out with new and unique innovations.

Which of the five business level strategies does the company employ?

A strategy is that AB InBev was able to take advantage of existing supply chains in target markets while purchasing new businesses, therefore raising network costs. They were capable of managing and sourcing any supplies from the organization due to the familiarity of the global supply chain. The company is also capable to partner with other loyal vendors worldwide at a low cost. With the expansion of the company, they have a lot of trust from others which allow them to employ the cost reduction strategy.

AB InBev’s managers throughout the world takes their workforce very seriously by taking practice to achieve their goals. The resources and skills plays a role when planning a strategy to acquire that specific task. These practices are recognized throughout their company and considered their workers as an important resource. This strategy is called Human Capital strategy.

Product diversification strategy is one of AB InBev’s way to continuing their success with their products. They expanded their original market for a product which increases sales with an existing product line. This allow the business to have a control with their costs and to maximize profits. Meaning, when there is a negative effect on the company due to the low profitability in the beer industry will be irrelevant.

AB InBev has a lot of success and recognition when it comes to reaching their peak with other competitors. The company would increase regional competition which would make it more appealing to outsiders. This will gain successful growth for the industry by employing industry attractiveness strategy.

By knowing their locations and consumers, it can benefit AB InBev to capture values. Their products are expanded in many overseas markets. Which enhances the consumer’s desire to pay through the use of the brand name of different global brands to their advantage. The company employs capturing value strategy to gain profits.

At the corporate level, how diversified is the company?

On a corporate level, AB InBev is a very diversified company. Some of their key characteristics such as their growth, cost reduction, product diversification, and industry attractiveness can impact their company worldwide. They are always focusing on marketing for creating brand position in the minds of consumers. Their growth continues to grow due to their unique strategies and business activities. Their products are expanding since they are different from other competitors. As for cost reduction, new arrivals would not have an effect on the supply chain for AB InBev’s target markets since they operate at a low infrastructure cost. They apply effective working strategy for doing their business. Their supply chains are incredibly large. When it comes to marketing for their company, they would always put their minds of the consumer first. This will allow for them to have a mindset on how to attract their consumers. Since, AB InBev is a company that have a differentiated variety of products. They can always depend on other brands to manage their costs and maximize profit.

As well diversified investments, AB InBev provides a diversified environment within the cooperation. According to their website, there are women leaders, equal work means equal pay, empowering caregivers, supporting LGBT rights, and serving those who serve (2019). A long with the supports that the company is providing to their communities and employees also there are nearly 180,000 colleagues around the globe and 500+ brands that are sold to more than 150 countries. The different brands of the company’s beverage can be found in Africa, APAC, Europe, Middle Americas, South Americas, North Americas, which totaling of 58 locations around those different regions. Based on the diversified investment, supports, and location, the company is doing well.

How has the company grown (or contracted) over the last five years?

For the last five years, AB InBev was grown by merging the other brewers’ company and buying the share of the other companies. They are known in more than 150 countries. Their top selling brands with the last five years are Corona, Budweiser, and Stella Artois. As the years go on, they continue to forecast the future and calculate to make a profit out of it. Some of the important topics that they focused on the freshness of how their beer tastes. Their heritage and integrity are always protected. One of their goal is to always respect the consumer choice. Also, sustainability and quality is an important factor. AB InBev cares about the environment and take action by following the 4 R’s rule. The safety preference is considered first for them.

Assess the success of their corporate strategy via 3 tests of a winning strategy.

A success of their corporate strategy is by capturing values and have a solid understanding of their profitability. A way to access their success is to satisfy their customer’s wants and to provide a suitable price range for the consumers. An example that AB InBev use is Stella Artois, it is a beer with European origins that is from Brazil. Their strategy is to convince the Brazilian’s to acknowledge that the beverage is a premium product.

Another winning strategy that the company can use is the gross profit revenue analysis. This will benefit the gross profit a company generates per dollar of income. Meaning, they can earn profits by a reasonable return on revenue as long as it is responsible for operating costs. Therefore, the company will know their total net sales leverage and their profitability of the company. Overall, by the price of goods sold by the corporation, or COGS is one of the main factors that can impact net income.

AB InBev has been a successful company and will continue if they maximize their winning strategies. First, they would always include their employees, brand, competitors, and customers when it comes to thinking for a strategy. By having connections with other vendors, cost reductions can improve the company a lot. The money that is not being use, can go towards another investment. It can either be a marketing strategy that can get their customers engaged which can increase their brand awareness. Overall, AB InBev continues to focus on improvements within the company.

Cite this page

Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer talked about the decision made by the commission and how they did not respect his beliefs. They also talked about the William Jack v. Azucar Bakery case and how different they were. Neil Gorsuch and Samuel Alito had a different opinion. They talked about how differently the commission treated the different cases. Gorsuch and Alito both talked about how the cases were not different. Clarence Thomas both had some of the same basis. She believed that they should have made the case on how the commission treated Phillips and that he should have been able to use his First Amendment. Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor agreed with Kagan on that the cases were different. They both did not agree with any of the commissioners. They did not see how the commissioners rude words to Phillips could make the court side with Jack Phillips (“Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado”).

Andrew T. Walker talks about how there are many effects to the case and Christians. Questions of if people would be able to stay quiet in this matter. If saying no effects them than it may cause some problems for people. Christians should not listen to other peoples ridicule towards them. People have started to take it personally. The way people think about the case changes because of their many feelings that may not be reliable to decide on any of the claims. Since America has a lot of freedoms there are people who have different attitudes that could be hurtful. Peoples feelings need to be based on facts, not on just their feelings. The way someone does not need to be put in the legal sphere. Andrew T. Walker explains that usually, the way people feel inside does not always work out in this matter. We all have to have our own constitutional rights being able to speak our minds.

Andrew T. Walker writes that there are a lot of religions talk about how they use their rights and now there is a lot of discussion on this matter. Anyone who has a different opinion on sexual orientation there causes problems. People are trying to take away the opinions on sexual orientation. They want other people to think the way that they think. Andrew T. Walker writes that they do not want open people do not want Christians to speak their mind. People will put laws in front of Christians and not choose to go with their views. People will use the outcome of the Masterpiece Cake Shop Case to be unfair.

Andrew T. Walker said that Christians say what they think about sexuality is true. Many people thought that Christians should not even put their opinion out there. Andrew T. Walker explains that there are a lot of hardships to this. Some people in power did not want to even look at their views on the topic. People see Christian views as judgmental and wanted to get rid of it. People should of gotten to know the Christian views and realize that it could be okay. The courts do not know a way to deal with certain laws. In the time ahead people will not know the arguments people will have. Christians might have some problems and other organizations that are affiliated with Christians. Christians wanted Jack Phillips to win the case.

Emma Platoff explains that the LGBT community wanted cases that may have came up to not be handled in that same way. Two of the positions are saying that they both won. Texas and Colorado both have differences in their laws. Craig and Mullins decided to take legal action against Jack Phillips to have an anti-discrimination law. In Texas, there are no laws like that. If other couples were in the same circumstances and there would be no law that would keep them from getting discriminated against. Emma Platoff reports that some of the cities in Texas have laws that are similar. Some people want there to be laws like that. Texas needed to protect people and that it is necessary. People in Texas had different views on the topic. Some of them said that there could never be a statewide law and would never pass. The LGBT laws to protect them always came up, but a lot of people are not a fan of that law. Emma Platoff talks about how in 2019, there could be many other cases similar that could come up. In Texas, they had laws that could help religious people to refuse in 2017. The bill called House Bill 385, created to say to the LGBT community wanting to adopt a child to say no.

Jeffrey Trissel wrote that in California, a woman named Cathy Miller (the baker) refused to sell cake to a same-sex couple. The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) took legal action. In Californias laws, it says that her saying no is okay. The (DFEH) tried to make an urgent request. Jeffrey Trissel explains that the cases are different because Cathy Lee said that they would not form a cake for them. Jack Phillips would not even sell them a cake. Cathy Lee recommended that the same-sex couple should go to another bake shop. Cases that deal with the freedom to speak is hard to make decisions for.

Cite this page

Introduction

With regards to the article describing the stories of employees of the company who were asked to openly talk about their encounters with oversight. Among these picked people is Mr. Damore, the previous Google engineer employee known for the long anti-diversity notice he circled inside the organization contending that men and women are inalienably naturally unique and hence suited to various professions. In this way, this notes that has been ricocheting around the web from a Mr. Damore over at Google, which he plots his declaration against assorted variety mediations. This man obviously posted this note, which is offending on an assortment of levels and encircled in the dialect of science and conduct, to the extensive listserv, were it typically induced excited and irate reactions. Numerous people significantly more expressive and briefer have just clarified why Mr. Damore’s activity was not adequate. However, also need to go into somewhat more insight concerning a part of his piece that hasn't yet been canvassed in incredible profundity.

Regarding organization culture, we realize that they make a decent attempt to develop a fun and stimulating workplace. Concerning Google's moral effect in a more extensive setting, the organization’s green qualifications incorporate free transport benefit for representatives and urging them to drive electric vehicles, with many charger points on location. Progressively over Google thinking about the workplaces quickly evokes pictures of diversions rooms and helter-skelters between floors. Google is additionally tending to the sexual orientation unevenness in the tech business by offering scholastic grants for ladies. The organization additionally gives a large number of worker hours and billions of dollars every year to great aims, including against human dealing philanthropies, untamed life preservation undertakings and software engineering instruction developers. Google isn’t reluctant to voice its sentiments on social issues, including LGBT rights. In 2010, Google started covering the additional assessment paid by its representatives in gay and lesbian connections a duty that doesn’t exist for straight hitched couples increasing present expectations for its Silicon Valley neighbors. The organization has likewise marked different submissions and supported pride festivities around the world.

Regarding the article relating the accounts of people who were asked to openly talk about their encounters with oversight. Among the picked people is Mr. Damore, the previous Google engineer known for the long enemy of assorted variety reminder he flowed inside the organization contending that people are characteristically naturally unique and, in this way, suited to various professions. The update spilled, there was an open objection and Damore was at last let go. To be thoroughly clear, Damore isn’t a casualty of oversight. He did some idiocy and got let go. In this vision, the notice turns into a web sensation and Google clasps to enormous open weight and flames a man for his disliked thoughts. Google isn’t the principal organization to determine the contention between nation law and organizational morals for morals. In any case, its exceedingly plugged choice will make organizations working far and wide delicate to the significance of seeing plainly, before any others do it, the potential impact of law and morals and of reasoning ahead about how to determine them considering organization esteems and partner not simply investor weights. We expect all representatives and board of individuals to know and pursue the code. Inability to do as such can result in disciplinary activity, including end of business. In addition, while the code is explicitly composed for Google representatives and board individuals, we expect Google temporary workers, experts and other people who might be briefly allocated to perform work or administrations for Google to pursue the code regarding their work for us. Disappointment of a Google temporary worker or specialist or other secured specialist co-op to pursue the code can result in end of their association with Google. Be that as it may, regardless of the lawful acrobatic of Damore’s lawyers, getting let go for his reminder wasn’t segregation and it unquestionably wasn’t oversight. As Google president Mr. Pichai said at the season of the notice’s dissemination, it disregarded the organization’s arrangements, sustaining misogynist belief systems. Damore uncovered to his non-male associates that he trusts that they are inclined to being more terrible at their occupations than guys.

Damore is persuaded that he lost his employment due to what he considers, instead of due to how he acted and that he is being rebuffed by a culture of political accuracy, which is the thing that used to be called human respectability. By guiding his update to people and little gatherings, by asking for criticism, by recognizing his own potential inclinations, and by recognizing that segregation plays a job in clarifying holes in results, Damore appears to have shown that he is eager to advance this discussion in accordance with some basic honesty. There is a contrast between separation based on foundation and segregation based on conduct. The previous is a partiality, discounting somebody before even met them. The last is essentially a judgment and it’s not only okay to pass judgment on individuals on how they treat others it’s commendable. Reasonableness and equity are not accomplished by ascertaining the mean normal of everybody’s sentiment, whatever those suppositions happen to be. Oppress individuals who are conservative and preservationist. Completely cheerful to say as much. It doesn’t see it as bad faith to pass judgment on individuals by their own characteristics, as opposed to their experience and appearance. 

Cite this page

Andrew Gillum is the Democratic nominee in the election for Governor of Florida. He is 39-years-old and was born in Miami, Florida. He was the youngest person in history to be elected to Tallahassee’s City Commission before he went on to become Mayor. Andrew Gillum is the first black nominee by a major party in Florida’s history.

Tallahassee’s government is the subject of a Federal Corruption FBI investigation due to his former volunteer treasurer, Adam Corey, attempting to lobby for the enlargement of the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency. The problem with this is, it directs public and private money to the rejuvenation of the city and infrastructure projects meaning that it could possibly be a pay-for-play scheme with local officers in exchange for their vote to help expand the Community Redevelopment Agency’s jurisdiction.

Andrew Gillum is an unwavering supporter of LGBT rights. He opposes gender identity-based discrimination and believes all Americans should be treated as equal regardless of what gender they are or what their sexuality is. He supports same-sex marriage and has even spoken about removing confederate monument that is placed at the Old State Capitol. He believes that it glorifies the most hideous parts of our history and that it should not be in the State’s capitol, let alone in front of the Capitol building.

Andrew Gillum’s stance on marijuana legalization is that we should legalize it and end the severe penalties that are placed on those caught with low level possession. He believes that the money made from taxing the plant could be used to invest into our education system, including a pay raise for the teachers and staff. His all-inclusive idea to attack the opioid epidemic is to implement a state-wide task force including police officers, paramedics and mental health advocates. He would like to restore the $11 million dollars that was cut from mental health funding and create opioid interference courts while also working with the government to secure more funding.

Andrew Gillum strongly opposes the “absolute right to gun ownership.” His stance is that he believes people struggling with their mental health and domestic abusers/criminals should not be able to obtain guns. He is against carrying a gun on a school campus and wants stricter gun laws. For example, he believes there should be an assault weapons ban and wants to get rid of the loopholes that are available when buying a gun at a gun show. He created a community watch program for Tallahassee when their crime rates were rising at an alarming rate that increased law enforcement and the community's engagement, while also strengthening the relationship between them.

Andrew Gillum is against defunding Planned Parenthood because he believes that is jeopardizes women’s health and thinks that every woman should have equal access to healthcare. Andrew Gillum supports the ratification of the Equal Rights Amendment meaning that he wants to end the civil rights that are denied to some citizens based on their gender.

Cite this page

1. “Politics is . . . very much a matter of struggling over meaning, not just of physical coercion.” Discuss, using examples.

If we take a look throughout history or study governments today across the globe, we would see power being used and enforced in a multitude of different ways. For many years the use of physical coercion was the method of exhibiting power over a people, yet today if a leader wants to remain in power, they often employ a number of different strategies. Hegemony, for example, utilizes the power of persuasion to stay in rule by offering mutual accommodations. Governments and rulers are much more likely to remain in power when offering their subordinates accommodations like schooling, housing, and healthcare, as opposed to ruling by force.

Those who struggle with their governments or those in power, fight over meanings. If we look at the U.S. today and the many civil rights movements that have taken place, we can understand the power that meaning has in human life. LGBT rights in the west have been an area for contention and are a prime example of the struggle over meaning between rulers and subordinates. People often accept rule or leadership as long as their needs are being met. The issues that are important to them must be recognized and they must feel like they are being taken care of.

2. What is meant by the claim that consumption needs are culturally shaped? Discuss and illustrate with examples.

Consumption is the economic activity referring to the using of material goods necessary to sustain human life. These goods generally consist of food, shelter, water, etc. and for some time, little research had been done to understand consumption any further than covering our basic needs. As researchers began exploring the different aspects of consumption, they came to find interesting patterns that are described as the internal explanation, external explanation, and the cultural explanation.

Influenced by evolution and ecology, anthropologists determined that species adapt to their particular ecozones by creating an econiche, surviving off the available plants and animals. From this idea, consumption needs are dictated by the surrounding ecology. Although, most groups of people do not utilize their surrounding environment fully. Instead, they cultivate the goods they deem acceptable and since ideas of acceptable goods changes from group to group we can see how culture may play a big role in the decisions made.

3. Compare matrilineality with patrilineality. How are they similar? How are they different? Give examples.

Matrilineage is the tracing of one’s heritage through the women in a family group. Alternatively, Patrilineality groups are linked through male heritage as in the United States. While patrilineality is the most common way around the world that groups trace lineage, matrilineage is not without its benefits. Typically, in a patrilineality, daughters will leave the home of their fathers and join another man’s family group. Matrilineages act in the same way, having the sons born to mothers leaving their homes and joining their wife’s family. Often times societies that trace lineage through women are matriarchal in nature. All goods and lands are transferred to family through the women, who maintain a considerable amount of power.

4. Why is ethnicity sometimes racialized?

As with many instances of discovering the origins of racism, looking to colonialism can answer the question of why is ethnicity sometimes racialized? During the period of colonialism, light-skinned Europeans dominated less powerful groups, often forcing them to take a subordinate role. As they gained power and dominion, the ideology of race emerged.

While in anthropology race has no scientific foothold, many light-skinned colonizers clung to the idea of white superiority. Creating stereotypes and associations with what they deemed “weaker races”, they forced a stigma that we still have not overcome to this day. Ethnicity may not be the same concept as race, although, it is often used as a means of discrimination.

5. Discuss cultural imperialism, cultural hybridity, and cosmopolitanism. How do anthropologists define these concepts, how are they related, and why are they important in contemporary anthropological discussions of globalization?

Cultural imperialism is the concept that some cultures are dominant or dominate smaller cultures. First used during the cold war, anthropologists used this term to try to understand how some cultures seem to extend past their own borders and infiltrate smaller societies. McDonald’s, for example, was created and made popular in the U.S., yet today it can be found at the far ends of the globe influencing those outside the U.S. This concept gave many anthropologists a moment’s pause, however, as cultural imperialism neglected the idea of human agency. Cultural hybridity on the other hand speaks of the borrowing cultures use between societies without losing their own identities. This idea was much more lenient in understanding human’s ability to borrow from other cultures while maintaining their own, yet it did little to determine how much borrowing a culture can do before it becomes a separate entity all on its own.

Cosmopolitanism alternatively, is an individual’s ability to feel at ease in one or more cultural settings. These ideas are important in discussions of globalization because they force us to recognize the idea of human agency and that culture is not a fixed point forever unchanged, but a fluid concept that changes according to those influencing it.

Cite this page

The power changes in America have been very dramatic. In the 1950’s, America has changed the social and economic view on electoral politics and affects till this day. As years go by there continues to be a lot of achievements. We can start with interest groups organization for new rights, citizens and political institutions had a great impact on the electoral results in the US. This helped rights expand, civil rights, women's rights, and LGBT rights. These groups wanted to fight the politics for their own rights. The mobilization tactics were used for efficacy, selective benefits and voting laws. It was still difficult to use these methods because policies for the public had already changed from new economic and social issues. Many people say the “culture war” affected the United States elections from the representation and voting. This will engage on the 1965 voting rights benchmark mobilization factors, methods, economic and social problems. Give us the Ballot: Modern Voting Rights in America by Ari Berman uses the 1965 Voting Rights Act to discuss disputes on mobilization. It describes the causes and effects that occurred. The turning point was in 2005 when the ballot was renewed numerous times. Shelby Co. vs Holder (2013) is a prime example of the motives of laws and section 5 of federal elections. All in the family: The Realignment of American Democracy since the 1960s by Robert O. The self-expresses of who is under control of the mantra of the family values on who controls the government. The most efficient way to making policies is having a unified government. These books will discuss the matters on political participation and electoral politics. This comes to show how a single amendment made a huge stamp on American history but more importantly how it changed its political foundation. With issues of racial discrimination, women equality discrimination, abortion discrimination and LGBT discrimination in America, changes were made due to strong Civil Rights movements getting involved.

The social and economic landscape of America has changed electoral politics from the 1950’s till today. In the past six decades there are many things we can look back on what helped transform modern day electoral politics. The main issues were socially being able to vote. Berman mentions, “One hundred years after the end of the Civil War, the VRA guaranteed the franchise for black Americans and other minority groups and fulfilled the long-overdue promise of the Fifteenth Amendment of 1870 which states that the right to vote shall not be denied.” (Berman, 6) As stated, it took 100 years after the Civil War in order for everyone to be allowed to vote. It’s clear that there were many battles that had to happened for change, and this is past decades alone. Berman continues, “The VRA quickly became known as the most important piece of civil rights legislation in the twentieth century and one of the most transformational laws ever passed by Congress.” (Berman, 6) This act gave more freedom for people to vote and eliminates the discrimination of discouraging others to vote. Some examples are suspending literacy tests or mandating states, so the federal government can make electoral changes.

The act was able to limit problems, but as time went on new problems appeared with voter discrimination. Berman explains, “Segregationist whites, known as Redeemers, regained power and quickly targeted black voters, first through violence and fraud and then via devices like good character tests, poll taxes and stringent residency requirements.” (Berman, 17) To find other ways of diminishing voting, local government and states had to make some efforts of resolving it quick. “Even though HAVA allocated $3.9 billion for states to modernize their election systems, count election officials in Ohio allocated far fewer voting machines than necessary to accommodate the high voter turnout” (Berman, 220) The major cities in Ohio were the main objectives, but younger voters had to wait almost ten hours to get a vote in. Help America Vote Act is an act that is supposed to help fight against voter discrimination and fraud.

In 1965, the Voting Rights Act became a great impact for interest groups and the affect in made on the outcomes of electoral votes. As well as the mobilization of reshaping America’s political parties and its public policies. When Johnson was President he fought for a new American society and Martin Luther King Jr.’s fought for civil liberties, this was able to happen due to the fact of voting rights changes. They were both able to fight causing a magnificent impact the electoral vote. The act being passed made mobilization and interest groups become the main roles for public policy and campaigns. An example would be the National Abortion Rights Action League, which was founded in 1969 to fight for abortion rights. There was really never a choice for women when it came to reproduction, they were expected to have the baby and if they decided not to they were socially exiled. The goal for this group was to fight for women rights but the main objective was to get women to have a choice of abortion. Viewing interest groups like NARAL, they engaged in the battle to help shape public policy and the political parties. Robert Self mentions in his monograph, “By the summer of 1973, NARAL and the ACLU Women’s Rights Project had filed suit in New York, Massachusetts, Texas, New Jersey, Ohio and half a dozen other states which together accounted for more than half the national population against public hospitals that refused to perform abortions.” (Self, 289) This movement for abortion became so big that it made it fairly easy to be acceptable, but Medicaid funds was the form of payment used for abortions. Many people did not like what was going on, mainly because they did not support abortion and received Medicaid. A political movement emerged and politicians took action, “In 1975 Henry Hyde (R-IL) along with Representative Robert Bauman (R-MD) and Senator Dewey Bartlett (R-OK) introduced resolutions prohibiting the use of Medicaid funds to perform abortions.” (Self, 289) This later became known as the Hyde Amendment and, “thus represented the national version of a tactic that had been employed at the state level since at least 1970, when New York’s reformed abortion law first went into effect.” (Self, 289) With abortion rights coinciding with the Democratic Party, it was certain that the Republican Party would take action since it is not part of their ideology.

The gay/lesbian rights socially changed citizens, which had an effect on reshaping public policy and transformed political parties today. In 1970’s politician Harvey Malik, who was openly gay ran for city supervisor in San Francisco to fight for gay civil rights. At this time gays and lesbians made an effort of taking their cases to city councils and state legislatures, “The Advocate optimistically called 1975 a year to remember when gay rights progress shifted and expanded.” (Self, 241) The Gay Activist Alliance, also known as the GAA, began pushing for Democratic Party members, “Activists in Chicago and Los Angeles followed suit, forming GAA groups or like-minded organizations and pressing for city council action. Across the country activists sought to fashion a liberationist politics disentangled from the splintering radical American left.” (Self, 224) With that happening many of the states reformed sexual criminal codes. Some cities passed gay civil rights and even the right wing newspapers began showing their support. With efforts of fighting for gays, the bill was not passed in state legislatures and opposing ideologies took action. In the monograph Self he explains, “the introduction of such bills in Oregon, California, New York, Connecticut, Colorado, Massachusetts and four other states awakened fierce opposition.” (Self, 241) Legislators intended proposing antigay bills, like in the state of Pennsylvania when they began receiving popular support and Louisiana passed a ban on same-sex marriage. Antigay violence grew in the next couple years to arson cases across the country, “fires had burned several Metropolitan Community Churches, the GAA office in New York, and a gay bar in New Orleans, where more than twenty people died.” (Self, 242)

America’s social landscape was progressively changing the conservatives and the Republican Party did not want to accept this. The citizens and interest groups created many public policies due to being involved in the electorate. This would then expand to the church’s and effected the nature of elections. During the time Jerry Brown was running for governor in the mid 1970’s, he promised to the Society of Individual Rights to sign a consensual adult sex law that was passed by California legislature early. When he was elected, he signed the bill into law, and then caused for the Coalition of Christian Citizens to speak out, “a group called the Coalition of Christian Citizens announced a referendum campaign to repeal the new law. Religious response to the Moscone-Brown law revealed an emerging schism among California Christians, one that mirrored a national split.” (Self, 242) Other similar groups worked through Bible bookstores in 1975 and 1976 to gain media attention but did not gain enough signatures to make action towards state legislature. This shows how much change happened socially and economically transformed electoral politics through political institutions, interest groups and citizens.

Another problem United States faced was women discrimination and inequality in the workplace. In the 1960’s the topic on family and work collided during the time women were, “constituting more than one-third of the paid workforce” (Self, 20) and faced issues on low wages, insufficient child care funds and sex segregation. When President Johnson implemented his New Frontier and Great Society programs, it caused women to become unequal in the workforce. The main goal was to help unemployed fathers support their families and young men can get an education so this occurrence does not happen again. Male dominance was very prominent in the United States. Robert Self mentions in his monograph, “In 1961, President Kennedy fulfilled a long-standing goal of the Women’s Bureau when he created the President’s Commission on the Status of Women” (Self, 21) Congress passed an Equal Pay Act after a couple of years, which was in effect since World War II. Even though sex segregation was still happening, many women made up very high percentages as teachers, nurses, secretaries etc. With progress being made for equality most women did not receive many labor options, “Women needed access to the entire occupational ladder-not special treatment as women but equal treatment as workers.” (Self, 22) Some organizations like the National Woman’s Party had rallies to fight for what they wanted. Looking into the economy more, it was realized that being fully committed in the labor force coexists with class. “For middle-class women, the problem was forced domesticity and denial of access to the market. For working-class women, the problem was forced market labor and the denial of full-time domesticity.” (Self, 23) Though it was seemed to be a loss for many, activists and interest groups gained political attention.

Congress executed the Voting Rights Act, which stops people from discriminating on voting. This allowed United States to create many changes in the 1950’s till this day. At a time of racial discrimination, women equality discrimination, abortion discrimination and LGBT discrimination in America, strong Civil Rights movements emerged to fight a battle of disagreement. The dramatic events that occur reshaped electoral politics. There were many interest groups that appeared ranging from GAA, the NWP to HAVA have all mobilized and changed the ways electoral votes are now. At first the battle for rights were tough because many did not agree. Many groups failed to get signatures in order for Bills to be passed. It was clear that there needed to be lots of support and convincing to be able to fight these culture war. When the culture wars were beaten, they would give a new look on the democracy and more equal opportunities. Allowing everyone to be given equal treatment and no voter feeling discriminated. Over the decades of America having it’s encounters of trouble, changes were made. 

Cite this page

After a long uphill battle, same-sex adoption is now legal everywhere in the United States. Great steps have been taken in recent years regarding this and other LGBT rights, such as the legalization of same-sex marriage. The nation seems to be at its most progressive point when it comes to the rights of the LGBT community; however, new threats to the right to adopt have arisen. It is possible that recent progress can be undone by new laws that allow private adoption agencies to discriminate against same-sex couples. Even though same-sex couples can legally adopt, that right is being threatened; therefore, the government needs to take action and prevent discrimination against same-sex couples in adoption agencies.

Same-sex couples’ right to adopt was not a large point of interest in the US until the late 1960s and early 70s as more members of the LGBT community were starting their own families (Rudolf). In 1968, a homosexual man named Bill Jones was the first single father to adopt a child in the state of California and one of the first in the US, but a social worker indirectly suggested that he keep his sexuality a secret during the adoption process (Rudolf). In 1978, New York became the first state in the US that did not turn adoption applicants away solely for “homosexuality” (Rudolf). In 1979, a same-sex couple in California became the first to adopt a child together in the US, but it would not be until 1997 when New Jersey 'became the first state to allow same-sex couples to adopt jointly statewide” (Rudolf). These key events in the history of same-sex adoption paved the way for more progressive actions to come.

Same-sex couples’ right to adopt has progressed far past what it was in the 1970s. One such example is the legalization of same-sex marriage; several states have enforced a marriage requirement for adoption applicants in order to prevent same-sex couples from adopting (Adoption by LGBT Parents), but the legalization of same-sex marriage lessened the significance of this loophole. In June 2015, in Obergefell v. Hodges, “the Supreme Court ruled by a 5-to-4 vote... that the Constitution guarantees a right to same-sex marriage”(Liptak); this meant that adoption agencies couldn’t turn gay couples away if they were married. Because of the Supreme Court ruling, every state in the US has legalized same-sex adoption; the last states that had banned same-sex couples from adopting were forced to allow it. Mississippi was the last state to lift the ban preventing same-sex couples from adopting in 2016 (Karimi). The ban, which was enacted in 2000, was deemed unconstitutional; since same-sex couples were given the right to get married the year prior to the ruling, Judge Daniel Jordan claimed that the ban “violated the ‘equal protection clause’ of the constitution” (Karimi). This leads to today’s current same-sex adoption status, which is the most progressive point in the decision’s history.

Although same-sex couples can adopt today, their right is currently being threatened. There are no laws that explicitly state that same-sex couples cannot adopt, but other bills that would make it extremely difficult for them to do so are making their way to the surface. Bills in several states are beginning to allow adoption agencies to reject potential adoptive parents based on religious beliefs, and this applies to same-sex couples. One such bill is Texas house bill 3859, which lets child welfare service providers “decline to provide, facilitate, or refer a person for child welfare services that conflict with, or under circumstances that conflict with, the provider ’s sincerely held religious beliefs” (House Bill 3859). The reasoning that the bill presents is to “maintain a diverse network of service providers” (House Bill 3859). Other bills, including Mississippi’s Protecting Freedom of Conscience from Government Discrimination Act and Oklahoma’s senate bill titled Children; prohibiting requirement for private agencies to participate in certain placements; prohibiting certain actions based on religious or moral convictions, would also allow faith-based agencies to discriminate against homosexual couples based on their own religious beliefs (bill citation) (bill citation). The fact that the government is letting this happen demonstrates how same-sex couples’ right to adopt is being threatened.

The bills, however, are not the only obstacle that same-sex couples face in the adoption process. As the bills have demonstrated, religious freedom is beginning to be used to deny same-sex couples the ability to adopt. Many same-sex couples also have difficulty pursuing second parent adoptions, or “a legal procedure that allows a same-sex parent, regardless of whether they have a legally recognized relationship to the other parent, to adopt her or his partner's biological or adoptive child without terminating the first parent’s legal status as a parent” (Adoption by LGBT Parents) ; In 36 states, adoption services still require couples to be married before getting a second parent adoption (Adoption by LGBT Parents). Some same-sex couples also have a hard time adopting children because there aren’t any gay-friendly adoption services near them. A study conducted by Lori A. Kinkler and Abbie E. Goldberg further examines this; the study examined the barriers that same-sex couples face when adopting in small metropolitan areas, and the findings indicate that these couples might have no other option than to go to faith-based agencies who, as mentioned previously, have the ability to turn away same-sex couples (Kinkler and Goldberg). In none of these circumstances was it completely illegal for same-sex couples to adopt, but each scenario presented immense difficulty in the process. The legality of same-sex adoption is without doubt a gigantic step towards LGBT equality, but with these obstacles it is possible for the progress to be undone.

Although there are many difficulties that same-sex couples face when trying to adopt, there is no evidence proclaiming that they are any less fit to be parents than heterosexual couples. A study on the development of children with lesbian mothers concluded that children develop very similarly in lesbian and heterosexual households (Brewaeys et al.); the relationships between the parents and the children were found to be the same in families with heterosexual parents and lesbian mothers (Brewaeys et al.), and the relationship between the children and the social mother in families with lesbian parents was found to be better than the relationship between the children and the father in families with heterosexual parents (Brewaeys et al.). Another study on the subject showed that gender development was not different in children raised by lesbian mothers and heterosexual parents (Kirkpatrick et al.). These studies display the capability of same-sex parents and present nothing that says otherwise; allowing them to adopt would not cause any harm to the children they adopt, and there are no reasonable excuses for adoption agencies to claim that they are unfit to be parents solely because of their sexual orientation.

Preventing same-sex couples from adopting would cause harm, however, because it would affect the average amount of adoptions in the United States. Over 16,000 same-sex couples adopt 22,000 children in the U.S. (Gates), and same-sex parents were also found to adopt about four percent of foster children in the nation (Gates et al.). Although four percent does not seem like a significant portion, it still contributes to the number of children in foster care. If same-sex couples are prevented from adopting, the contributions that they make to the total amount of adopted children are bound to decrease; Therefore, same-sex couples should be able to adopt children in order to prevent the average amount of adoptions in the U.S. from decreasing.

Of course, the intention of the bills was not to decrease the amount of children adopted from foster care in the US. The bills were passed mainly in order to please the faith-based adoption agencies that are fighting for the ability to reject certain adoption applicants based on religious beliefs (House Bill 3859). For this reason it should be no surprise that religious conservatives make up the majority of supporters for these bills. Not only are new bills being made, but old laws are being recontextualized for ulterior motives; the Religious Restoration Act of 1993 is being recontextualized to allow these agencies to turn away potential parents (Do No Harm Act).

The prevention of adoption by same-sex couples has negative effects in several areas. Because it limits the pool of potential adoptive parents, it leaves more children to be left unadopted. More than 20,000 children “age out” of adoption services each year (Lett), and of those children, 25% had been imprisoned within three years of turning 18 (Lett), and over 25% faced homelessness by 21 (Lett). Also, children who are still in foster care are more likely to be living in unsafe neighborhoods and financially unstable households than adopted children (Zill 5). To let these children be raised in foster care for the entirety of their childhood when capable potential parents are being prevented from adopting is irresponsible. Moreover, having this amount of children be raised in foster care for their entire childhood is detrimental to the state that takes care of them; state funds can suffer greatly depending on the amount of children in foster care, but much money can be saved by increased adoption (Zill 3). It is the government’s responsibility to handle these financial matters, and increased adoption would improve state budgets, along with solving the issues with children who aged out of the system. Welcoming all capable potential parents, including same-sex couples, would help solve the problem.

A case study conducted by the University of California further proves the capability of same-sex adoptive parents. The university created a study that compared the cognitive development and behavioral issues of high-risk children adopted by heterosexual couples and homosexual couples. From their findings they concluded that gay and lesbian parents were more likely to adopt children with higher risk factors and children of a different race from their own (Lavner et al.), children in both gay and straight parent households were found to achieve great gains in their cognitive development (Lavner et al.), and that the only significant difference between children with gay and straight parents was that children with same-sex parents were found to have significantly less internalizing problems within the first two months of placement (Lavner et al.). In the end, few differences were found between children of heterosexual couples and same-sex couples (Lavner et al.). All of the findings of this study indicate that adopted children of both heterosexual couples and homosexual couples gained from the adoption, along with supporting the argument that same-sex couples are perfectly capable of adopting and raising children; however, religious adoption agencies are still given the right to turn these couples away because of their sexual orientation, despite the fact that it prevents children in foster care from getting the opportunity to live in supportive homes. The factual evidence does not support these actions, and therefore the government needs to prevent the unnecessary discrimination from occuring.

Some argue, however, that the factual evidence is not where the main focus should be, but rather on the freedom of speech and the rights of faith-based adoption agencies. As Brad Polumbo puts it, faith-based adoption agencies “have First Amendment rights, and their freedom of conscience should be respected, even when their beliefs are politically incorrect or downright discriminatory” (Polumbo). Some argue that, because private adoption agencies are supported by taxpayer money, they should not be able to discriminate against any adoption applicants for The new laws aim to protect the rights of faith-based adoption agencies, not to prevent homosexual couples from adopting; the bills previously discussed would not prevent same-sex couples from adopting completely, but would allow religious agencies to turn them away based on their religious beliefs and still be able to function, which many argue is a good thing (Polumbo). If no harm is being caused, then many argue that it should continue.

Faith-based adoption agencies being shut down would also harm adoption rates, which is precisely what the other side is protesting against. Shutting down faith-based adoption agencies would actually limit adoption and fostering; faith-based agencies have high rates of placing older children and children with disabilities, along with providing assistance to women with unplanned pregnancies (Kao). If faith-based agencies are shut down, then these children will still have to live in foster care. Many such occurrences have taken place during the feud between religious adoption agencies and LGBT advocates; in Illinois, for example, the Catholic Charities were forced to close their doors due to anti-discrimination laws, which “led to the displacement of more than 2,000 children in 2011” (Kao). The placement of as many children in foster care as possible should be the number one priority in this situation, and shutting down religious adoption agencies would be a massive hurdle in reaching that goal.

Religious adoption agencies also argue that the abundance of agencies that are accepting of same-sex couples should allow them to continue denying these couples the ability to adopt from them. Every state in the country allows fostering or adoption by homosexual couples (Kao). Because of this, several argue that giving faith-based agencies the right to decline service to those that would conflict with their religious beliefs would not stop same-sex couples from adopting (Polumbo). As Emilie Kao pointed out, “Almost 40 percent of all adoption agencies, and 83 percent of public agencies, report that they have made at least one adoption placement with an LGBT person” (Kao). Not only is the accessibility of adoption agencies for same-sex couples supported by these statistics, for the amount of adoptions by same-sex couples themselves is proof enough; in 2010, 22,000 adoptions were by same-sex couples, while the number was only 6,500 in 2000 (Kao). In short, letting smaller religious adoption agencies decline to serve homosexual couples does not appear to prevent them from adopting, since there are many other adoption agencies that accept them.

It is not necessary, however, to shut down faith-based adoption agencies over the matter. Closing faith-based agencies would certainly have a negative effect on the amount of adoptions in the US; however, it is not the goal of same-sex couples or lgbt advocates to do so. Adoption is the goal that they are trying to achieve. To counter the argument that same-sex couples always have the means to do so, a study conducted by Lori A. Kinkler and Abbie E. Goldberg proves that this is not the case; the study examined same-sex couples who were trying to adopt in small-metropolitan areas, and findings indicated that it was extremely difficult for them to adopt in these areas. 80% of participants said that they encountered at least one obstacle, and 18% of participants said that they had difficulty finding gay-friendly adoption services near them (Kinkler and Goldberg). If faith-based agencies were forbidden to turn same-sex couples away, the adoption process should have been much easier and more accessible for them, making it more likely for successful adoptions in these areas.

The tension between same-sex couples who wish to adopt and faith-based agencies is still high, and possible resolutions have not yet taken effect. One possible way to end the conflict would be to pass the Do No Harm Act; the act states that its goal is to “amend the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 to protect civil rights and otherwise prevent meaningful harm to third parties” (Do No Harm Act). In other words, the act, if passed, would limit the aforementioned Religious Freedom Restoration Act’s power by taking away the adoption agencies’ ability to discriminate based on religious beliefs. With this enforced, same-sex couples could be able to adopt at such agencies, thus creating the potential to increase the number of adopted children in the US.

If faith-based agencies refuse this method, Robin Fretwell Wilson, director of the Family Law and Policy Program at the University of Illinois College of Law, proposed an alternative solution. Wilson suggested a compromise that would allow both sides to get a part of what they want. Her plan includes giving money directly to the families who are ready to adopt, thus allowing them to choose an adoption agency that best fits their wants and needs (Friedman). She hopes that her plan will “[ease] the ‘chokepoint’ between LGBT couples and faith-based agencies in communities with a limited number of providers” by distributing funds more broadly. As Wilson stated, “Deciding when, if ever, it is acceptable for providers to refrain from facilitating an adoption will stave off a wave of litigation and years of uncertainty” (Wilson). Whatever the decision may be, action must be taken soon to prevent any more negative effects.

With all this being said, it is safe to say that same-sex couples adopting children is at the very least going to be altered in the years to come. The question is how. With all differing points of view considered, it is hard to determine what the best way to go about this issue is; however, the rights of faith-based adoption agencies should not be used to pardon discrimination against same-sex couples. With the need for more adoptions and the amount of same-sex couples who desire to adopt, a solution should not be difficult to find. All things considered, the government’s choice should be an easy one to make.

Cite this page

Historical process: Civil Rights

The Second World War saw an inclusive nation go out to fight, but the returnees sought to place everyone at the level that they had been before the war. The war brought the best out of women as they were involved in various companies that were manufacturing artillery for the war. They would take many shifts in a day to ensure that the forces had the required weapons on the war front. In the case of the African Americans, they came back to being placated at the bottom, just as it was before the war (Schaller). The Jim Crow laws made it hard for the destruction of the divisive nature of the coexistence between the races. In the same way, the pearl harbor attack had changed the situation for the Japanese who had to regain the trust they once had, as the house of representatives rewarded the Chinese for being loyal and eased their entry into the country. In the years that followed, various changes took place in regard to equity, discrimination at work, recognition of the rights of the various groups some of which were termed as abnormal or mentally ill such as the LGBT community, as well as, the rise of a newer wave of feminism towards the end of the 1960s, and into the 1970s to the present (Schaller). The events after the Second World War shaped the outlook of the nation of America in major social issues.

The years immediately before and after the war were the biggest for the black community as they joined up to topple the segregationist laws leading to better laws being made by President Lyndon Johnson. After the civil war, the country had entered a phase of reconstruction. In this

Flores 2

phase, the blacks were totally involved whereby some of them took various public offices. The white community in the south was not comfortable being equal to people that they had prior enslaved. This lead to various waves of changes which made public places accessible only to people based on their races. Thus, segregation began. By the 1950s, the country was still facing these problems as various schools, majorly in the south could not allow races to mix. Blacks would face violence from the community, while as the various segregation laws broke, many of them would have projectiles thrown at them for attending formerly whites-only schools. Of course, in the same period, women also arose and started demanding an equal place in society. They too could make an equal contribution if the systems did not stand in the way.

In the 1940s, one feature of the struggle was the massive conscription of the African American to fight in the Second World War followed by a number or protests in the 1950s and 60s. The conscription would kill two birds with one stone which would see getting better rights, and defeating the Japanese. Given the effort of all the races forming America, the Japanese were defeated, but the case of civil rights never changed when they got back to the country. They called the campaign the double v campaign. Later in the years, Harry Truman wanted to involve the other races in defence of the nation and its protection from any form of an adversary. Thus, he issued an executive order in 1948 ending discriminator in the forces, and that is the furthest that campaign went. The case of Brown versus the Board of Education was decided by the Supreme court in 1954. The case involved a consolidation of five cases, all targeting complaints about various cases of discrimination across the nation in the public schools. Despite the ruling meant to end the segregation, many schools continued the practice as the community and

Flores 3

teachers were opposed to the practice. Rosa Parks is one remembered character who refused to give up her seat to a white man in a bus in Alabama. What followed saw a concerted effort by the black community who boycotted the Montgomery buses. Various actions were instituted including police brutality for the people that were walking to work given that the buses were losing business. The protests took over a year until the supreme court intervened again (Schaller). The protest can be associated with others that followed, and the fact that many people had to suffer as they tried to gain acceptance in prior segregationist areas. Thus, in 1957, Martin Luther Jr. And others also sought to establish a movement to fight against these seemingly bad laws that forced some people to have subpar services from the government yet they had the same measure when being taxed. 1957 was a good year since it also saw the president, Eisenhower sign an Act that made illegal the process of intimidating voters making them not exercise their rights to vote. In some cases, the president would be required to send Federal troops to help students access their schools. Through the years that followed whereby students sit-ins happened, protests, bombings of protesters and ultimately, the 1964 signing of the Civil Rights Act by President Lyndon B. Johnson.

The Civil rights Act looked at all people equally as one would not be discriminated from getting a job from any personal difference. Thus, whether black, gay, Latino, disabled and so forth, a person had a right to a job as long as he or she exhibited the characteristics that the organization deemed necessary for the job. In relation to other countries, the country was being sluggish in enacting laws that exhibited respect for other races. It would be expected that, as the nation was fighting for the democracy of other countries, fighting the Soviets in Korea, and later

Flores 4

Vietnam that it had its house in order (Class Notes). It made no sense to leave a place where blacks, gay, Asians, and women had secondary rights to go out and fight for the same races races and genders outside the country, dying for the conviction for a need for equality while at home, the divergent groups had to kick and fight for the same. In a big way, it came out as hypocritical.

Feminism wave also arose in the time since for many years, women had fought to be treated as equals. The demands were not being met as the women continued to get low paying jobs, with most efforts and courses of study being more of man-only areas. The book written by Betty Friedman gave the feminist debate the impetus as it gave women things to think about, which helped women to start seeking better terms for themselves. Thus, as other races were fighting for equality, women were fighting to be put at the same level as men. Under the title four of the Equal Pay Act, it was made clear that gender would not be used to underpay employees (Schaller). It was a step in the right direction given the very many women factory workers who were getting lower wages than men. In the new Civil Rights Act of 1964, gender was noted as one of the cases that could not be used to discriminate alongside race, and other human features seen as inferior prior to the signage. Friedman and Gloria Steinem formed an organization for women that advocated rights to abort, freedom from domestic violence, equal education opportunities, as well as, no discrimination at work. Other women organizations were also started such as the Red-stockings, New York Radical women, as well as, woman house. Over the years, various protests took place. These saw the 1972 law against gender bias in education by Richard Nixon being passed. In that period, there were changes in many ways that women presented themselves; they went against the expectations as they shifted every aspect that many

Flores 5

people would attribute to the women. Through the protests by women, Roe V. Wade law made abortion legal allowing women to terminate a pregnancy in the first three months of the pregnancy, later, the government would consider the health of the mother.

Counterculture coincided with the war in Vietnam and the equal rights movements as the youths came out against the so-called norms and advocated for a difference in practice in the period. Majorly, the youth were involved, and their thinking was essential since they made major protests pitting the blacks against the racists to have extensive white participation. The involvement of many young people of the Caucasian race in the protests was central towards the country seeing the future trends and as such grant them their wishes. Looking at the protesters, many races participated, which helped in passing a message concerning the need for change. There was a generation gap, and the young people simply implied they did not have a stake in whatever was going in the country. In a way, they saw the war in Vietnam as unnecessary, saw the various social conflicts as not worthy, and did not see the reason to be involved in ‘old people’ affairs. Thus, they resisted much of which involved them especially if it was not adding much value. They can be termed to have reshaped the face of America and were the reason behind the wide range of arousing issues and their acceptance.

One feature worth checking regards the LGBT situation in the period as well, which also changed much of what they were facing. Before the Second World War, some people had tried to create advocacy groups for the LGBT community, but it was not possible. Later, Senator McCarthy tried investigating gays and lesbians that were working for the government a situation that led to LGBT communities demanding fair treatment in their workplaces. The Lavender

Flores 6

Scare took place in the year 1953 as President Eisenhower banned people that ‘practiced’ homosexuality from working for the federal government. This was due to fear that they would be ‘targeted for blackmail by the communists’ (Schaller). Illinois re-decriminalized same-sex relations in a repeal of its sodomy laws in 1961. Advocacy entailed a fight to legalize same-sex relations and marriages, which never happened at the time but has been happening at the moment in most countries. They were also clamoring for people’s recognition as a regular group, and for people not to term them ill. Some of the highlight scenarios were the Stonewall riots. In 1969, the police started harassing people in Stonewall, a gay establishment. Currently, many prides are majorly held in the month of June as Commemoration for the Stonewall riots. Various important wins from the various LGBT rights crusaders saw the American Psychiatric Association change the status of homosexuality from being a mental illness as people prior perceived. In 1974, Kathy Kozachenko, an openly gay person won a city council seat in Michigan. In the same year, Elaine Noble was elected to the Massachusetts assembly. The following years saw people that had undergone gender assignment and openly gay men were voted into public offices in the cases of Renee Richards and Harvey Milk in California assembly respectively.

The historical timeline of America is riddled with various interesting, illustrious, not-so-illustrious, and quite revolutionary happenings. All these helped in shaping America that it is today. The revolutions of the 1950s-60s were instrumental in the development of the social space for the black people other races and the women. Other groups that had earlier in the years been termed as ill ended up getting a better space. Where it never worked, the revolutions, protests, and advocacy helped in planting a seed that sprouted leading to the social liberties

Flores 7

enjoyed by the Americans today. Still, there is a long way to go regarding racism, women equality in the workplace, as well as, the position of the LGBTQ community within the country.

Cite this page

David Levithan’s The Realm of Possibility is a remarkable novel written in prose, making it one of the most unique young adult novels to be read. It’s not like every novel, in more ways than one. Levithan writes about twenty characters, each with their own chapter, but divided into five sections. Each poem differs in length, but no character is more important than the other. There is not a designated protagonist, nor is there a designated topic. Levithan writes about struggling with sexuality, race, religion, and more. He manages to reach every teen, offering each of his readers at least one character to identify with. With its universal appeal, artistic quality, and strength to undeniably stand the test of time, The Realm of Possibility is bound to be a classic. Every generation of teenagers is sculpted by the social, political, and economic events of their adolescence. Diana Devecha, a developmental psychologist, analyzes how the social aspect of current events has been influenced by the technological uproar of today's society. Devecha uses research done by Jean Twenge to distinguish current adolescents from the past generations’ based on information she gathers from nationally representative surveys.

These surveys have asked teenagers the same questions year after year in order to allow comparisons among Boomers, Gen Xers, Millennials, and iGens at precisely the same ages. Twenge names the generation born between 1995 and 2012 “iGens” for their prevalent use of the iPhone. The author and psychologist believes iGens are more respectful and inclusive because of the circumstances of current society. Today’s teens are exposed to the realities worldwide due to the quick and easy access they have to the news. Adults tend to assume teens today are oblivious to current events because they are using their technology too often to socialize, but apps such as Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, and YouTube can actually contribute to informing its users. All of these popular applications have accounts that intend to keep viewers informed of local and global headlines. Snapchat and Twitter have designated sections that are exclusively intended to inform viewers of recent events. Instagram and YouTube have users who upload daily, even hourly, with updates just as any news station would.

News stations even have accounts on these apps to reach audiences that may not come across it on the radio or television. Because of the easy access teens have to such devices and applications, they can be informed quicker of events, including the growing LGBT+ movement. Devecha considers how technology affects today's generation of teens’ mental, emotional, and physical health. Devecha concludes that teens today are more inclusive. In today's society, it is much easier to come across true stories from personal perspectives through social media and the internet. One no longer has to purchase a memoir to read about someone's traumatic experience that shaped them as a person. These sorts of stories can be found summarized online or even simply posted on one’s personal account. People decide to come out online because they feel safer there than they do in person or with their own family. A survey of more than ten thousand LGBT teens shows that 4 in 10 LGBT youth feel their community is not accepting (Hartogs). 73% of youth surveyed reported being more honest about themselves online than in the real world. 53% of people report being out online, while 39% of people feel that people you meet in person should not be generally trusted ('Chapter 3: The Coming Out Experience'). Research shows that people have been coming out sooner in recent generations and that LGBT+ discrimination has been decreasing.

The internet has helped teens find acceptance when there is none in their homes or schools. Similarly, Levithan’s book leaves the audience feeling safe and accepted. Considering the book was released in 2004, well before smartphones were popular (Arthur), LGBT+ books likely had a similar effect on adolescents at the time that social media does on adolescents today. On May 17, 2004, the first legal same-sex marriage in the United States took place in Massachusetts ('LGBT Rights Milestones Fast Facts'). In 2008, the California Supreme Court ruled that marriage cases that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples are unconstitutional. In August of 2016, The Human Rights Campaign estimated that there were at least 41 openly lesbian, gay and bisexual Olympians, while there were only 23 that participated in London 2012. In April of 2017, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Civil Rights Act prohibits workplace discrimination against LGBT employees after Kimberly Hively sued Ivy Tech Community College for violating Title VII of the act by denying her employment. Over a year later, Democratic US Representative Jared Polis won the Colorado governor's race, becoming the nation's first openly gay man to be named governor. There are approximately nine million members of the LGBT+ community in America today (Greve).

This can be roughly compared to the population of New Jersey. Today’s adolescents are less likely to renounce Levithan's work because of the advancements the LGBT+ community has made since the release of the novel. Levithan released his book at the perfect time. By releasing it in 2004, he allowed himself to reach out to the LGBT+ community before the movement truly advanced. At this time, writing about a gay couple was not mistaken for “trendy.” In recent years, there have been people among both celebrities and locals who have come out for attention. Films, television series, novels, and autobiographies have been accused of only coming out as a marketing ploy in the past few years. Levithan’s book cannot be accused of being despicably trendy because, at the time of its release, it was actually a risk. However, The Realm of Possibility is more than just a groundbreaking novel on sexuality. 'Poetry can be a vehicle for messages of social justice (Kemp).” Levithan’s poetry reaches stories of race, religion, and ultimately just an understanding of the different parts of society. Levithan even addresses students who suffer from anorexia or are struggling with losing a parent. America is much more ethnically and racially diverse than it was fifty years ago (Fry). “Large-scale immigration from Asia and Latin America, the rise of racial intermarriage and differences in fertility patterns across racial and ethnic groups have contributed to Millennials being more racially and ethnically diverse than prior generations.”

With America becoming more and more diverse with time, The Realm Of Possibility can be expected to be read by various growing communities of minorities in the future. Levithan wrote his book to provide his audience with a safe and secure environment. He built a school of students, all with different stories, to show the reader that they are not alone. Some of the most famous works intentionally lack specified images and characteristics because it allows readers to visualize the setting as their own (FitzGerald). Young adult novels, such as Levithan’s, are so popular among students because they encourage individuality and ensure that their identity cannot be denied. He recognizes that past generations try to keep their children from reading novels in which they will defy the morals their parents have instilled in them, and it is undeniable that the same applies here. However, considering the shift in societal views, the book will likely, one day, be read without being viewed as controversial. David Levithan’s The Realm of Possibility can be expected to be read by generations to come because of how it tackles society’s biggest flaws. One would be ignorant to think that our issues with racism, homophobia, transphobia, and religious discrimination will be resolved by the time the next generation of high schoolers is reading this novel. This novel will continue to serve as a comrade throughout the stages of societal awareness as it creates a reputation for itself as a classic.

Cite this page

Mary Crow Dog’s We Aim Not to Please is a first-hand account of Crow Dog’s time spent involved with the American Indian Movement. A movement initially created to contest police brutality would later lay the foundation for social change, and restore a greater sense of pride and spirituality among native people. The methods and the general feeling of racial mistreatment and injustice aren’t uncommon to what we still handle in our modern day.

The American Indian Movement was founded in 1968 in Minnesota. The fathers of the movement were men doing time in Minnesota prisons. Its earlier members were Indians who had lost most of their culture and traditions (Crow Dog 322). The leaders of that time were Clyde Bellecourt, George Mitchell and, Dennis Bank. The leaders spoke out in opposition to high unemployment, slum living conditions as well as other racist treatments. They worked in efforts to regain tribal land and fought against many of the federal treaties that threatened the preservation of their rights and homelands (Maxey). The unpunished deaths of natives would be the cause of feelings that birthed the “Trail of Broken Treaties” in 1972. Furthermore, the US government’s failure to uphold their end of treaties made with Indians caused much of the unrest between several tribes. The Trail of Broken Treaties was the greatest action taken by Indians since the Battle of Little Big Horn. The first person to propose a march on Washington was Bob Burnette. Each caravan was led by a medicine man or a spiritual leader, each marching different a trail for different reasons. Sioux tribe, for example, started from Wounded Knee to symbolically feel as though the ghosts of murdered women and children were marching with them (Crow Dog 327).

Upon arriving in Washington, allies who had promised them housing and food when they arrived had been intimidated into withdrawing their support. Their list of twenty demands was outrightly ignored by many high officials, including President Nixon. Under duress, someone suggested to march on the Bureau of Indian Affairs. After a week-long takeover of the building that the government opened up to negotiations, that in turn would never be met such as; a promise to review their twenty-point list of grievances and not to prosecute for the BIA takeover. From a practical standpoint, nothing had been accomplished but morally, they were victorious. This protest would just be one of many held in the pursuit of justice.

Around that time, other demographics, particularly African Americans had also started movements to protest the social unfairness they faced. Despite the similarities between the two groups, Crow Dog found it noteworthy to mention that Indians had referred to a black person as a “’black white man’”. She went on to explain that the most distinguishable quality between the two had been that black people strived to have what white men have. “They want in, We Indians want out!” (Crow Dog 324) We can still see a real-world comparison in regard to how minorities are treated by others that are racially oppressed. With many people being predisposed to ethnic biases, it can prove difficult for even people in similar circumstances to dismiss them.

Still to this day, we are shown proof of having not advanced very far past the issues that plagued the Native Indian community. Movements like BlackLivesMatter founded in part by 3 women, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Khan-Cullors and, Opal Tometi. Similar to the goals of AIM, BLM focuses its efforts on “imaging and creating a world free of anti-blackness, where every black person has the social, economic, & political power to thrive”. Originally, BLM acted as “a call of action” to intervene when violence was inflicted on African Americans by police and vigilantes. A prominent example of perpetuated violence against black people would be the case of Trayvon Martin. Martin was a young black teen who was gunned down by a neighborhood watch member George Zimmerman, that was later found not guilty of his murder. The verdict would result in inciting a thirty-one-day takeover of Florida’s State Capitol. Though unfortunate, the verdict would turn out not to be the last of its kind. In similar cases like the Michael Brown case, that brought nationwide attention to the plights of those in the African American community. Some would argue that this case, much like Norman Little Brave’s was a catalyst that would launch BLM from a chapter-based member-led organization to a movement on a global scale. It also would inspire many other movements just like it. In the years that have passed, many efforts continue to be made in the pursuit of justice, still instances keep on piling up. The Washington Post later published a database that allows readers to see the amount of police involved fatal deaths there have been in the last 3 years. The results show little to no improvement in number.

Meanwhile, in cases unrelated to BLM, such as the DAPL movement against the approval of a pipeline through Dakota. The movement would come to be what NBC news called “the largest modern-day gatherings of indigenous people”. The construction of this oil pipeline was set to run through Sioux reservation and beneath the Missouri river, where many felt as though it could create great danger for their water supply. Although met with great opposition, the Trump administration did not show any signs of giving up despite the ill feelings of many in the Standing Rocks Sioux tribe. In fact, following Trump’s inauguration the full environmental review promised was rushed, solidifying the long-time reputation of breaking promises to the tribe (Helsel, Medina). The pipeline was still constructed despite multiple lawsuits and the protests of thousands of people. Its evident that still in today’s age the opinions, and desires of minorities are still being overlooked.

However, racial issues are not the only ones to have been highlighted by public demonstration. The gay community has long been a target of much ill-treatment in the United States. Gays were previously diagnosed as having a “sociopathic personality disturbance”. They were banned from obtaining certain jobs and faced social scrutiny. In June of 1969, a popular gay bar in lower Manhattan was raided by police. In response to that riots, and demonstrations took place that we later considered the first gay pride parade. The pride parade has gone on to be a staple of celebration and unity from state to state. After years of hardships, through the power of determination and desire for change, great strides have been made in providing equal rights and opportunities to those in the LGBT community. In 2011, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was repealed, a military policy banning openly gay men or women from joining the armed forces, and only as of four years ago did, they finally earn the right to marry one another. Even with great efforts made, there is still work to be done until everyone by law is viewed equally.

The American Indian Movement continues to lead as an example of what can be done to bring awareness to social wrongness. The movement and one’s similar have given a stage to a voice that was once talked over or silenced. It’s important that we as a nation, work intently on promoting pride in who you are from the color of your skin to your beliefs. And to be fairly treated despite what those may be. It also remains vital to hold the government and its citizens appropriately accountable for their actions. In time, we can recreate the world to be more a more accepting, honest and fair place to live and raise future generations.

Cite this page

Candidate: There are many events where my beliefs led to change, but the two I would pick are the Save Our Children campaign and the Briggs initiative a.k.a proposition 6. Proposition 6 was a ballot initiative put to a referendum on the California state ballot, lucky for our community the failed initiative that sought to ban gays and lesbians from working in public schools, and anyone who even supported them was not passed. The majority of the people voted no. My belief led to change because the idea for the Briggs initiative was formed during the success of the repeal of the county anti-discrimination language the measure was the first attempt to restrict LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) rights through a statewide ballot, and it showed that gays were a lot stronger than people previously thought. The second event where my belief led to change was during the Save Our Children campaign. was made to reach many more people and I became popular quickly due to my concern for the people. I also knew that by being in office I would be able to be instrumental in placing a ballot initiative approved by Mayor Moscone that successfully replaced citywide elections with district elections, a good start to sponsoring a Civil Rights bill. This bill banning discrimination in public accommodations, housing, and employment based on sexual orientation passed by the supervisors by a vote of 11-1 and co-found a gay democratic club city's first Democratic Club with the word 'gay' in its name, a controversial and radical move this also showed that the LGBT community would fight back because we deserve basic rights just as much as they do.

Save our Children overturn a recently legislated ordinance that banned discrimination based on employment and public accommodation based on sexual orientation. However, I would not let that happen, not to me, not to any other gay men, boys, or any of my people at all. These people had the idea that we gays were trying to “turn” the children into our lifestyle. This is completely absurd because being gay isn't a choice. So I did something about it. I mean I'm just a businessman who happens to be gay and although we failed. It was a good start for us. This impacted change because now as a political board member I can speak out and get my message across further than I ever could. We needed a gay man to represent the gays, not some sympathetic liberal, and more people started to look up to me and come out to their families Journalist: “What oppositions/challenges may have hindered the change that you promoted?”

Candidate: Many challenges hindered the change I was promoting. One of the obstacles was a woman named. In 1977 in Miami Florida a political coalition, made to However Anita Bryant, claimed that the ordinance discriminated against her right to teach her children Biblical morality, although I believe that to teach kids that they should discriminate and hate others based on something a human can't change is nothing god would want. Nevertheless, the well-organized campaign caused a bitter response between the gay community, and for good reason, I would say, and highly motivated Christian finalists. But unfortunately for us when the repeal of the ordinance went to vote, it attracted the largest response in Dade county's history, and the bill passed by 70%. This was a huge loss for our community but it only encouraged us to fight harder for our rights. A small hiccup like this can't stop us, nothing can, and if a bullet should enter my brain, let that bullet destroy every closet door.

Cite this page

People Megan Fox (Memphis, TN) is a bisexual actress and model. She is best known for her roles in the movies Transformers, Jennifer's Body, and Confessions of a Teenage Drama Queen. “I have no question in my mind about being bisexual,' she told Esquire. Miley Cyrus (Franklin, TN) is pansexual. Although she may be best known for her acting role as the eponymous Hannah Montana and her songs such as 'Wrecking Ball' and 'Party in the USA,' Miley has been a fierce supporter of LGBT inclusion through her art and philanthropy. This Grammy-nominated artist will be pushing the envelope for years to come. Calpernia Addams (Nashville, TN) is a transgender icon. She served as a Hospital Corpsman with the Navy and United States Marine Corps and came out as transgender during her last year of service. Her personal and tragic love story was showcased in the movie Soldier’s Girl. In 1999, while working as a performer, Addams began dating PFC Barry Winchell. Word of their relationship spread at Winchell's Army base, where he was harassed by fellow soldiers and ultimately murdered. The trial resulted in widespread press and a formal review of the US military’s 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' (DADT) policy. Eden Atwood (Memphis, TN) is an out intersex artist, jazz musician, actor, activist, teacher, mother, and co-creator of the Interface Project website.

The Interface Project emphasizes that “No Body Is Shameful” and encourages intersex people to record videos to provide representation for intersex people who have yet to find community and support. Rebecca Young, with the assistance of the ACLU of Tennessee, filed a lawsuit when she was publicly reprimanded and censored by the school system for wearing a shirt that read 'Some people are gay, get over it!' ACLU-TN legal director Thomas H. Castelli stated, “Students have a First Amendment right not only to be out at school, but to an education free from such discrimination and harassment.” The case reached a settlement in 2016. Places The organization East Tennessee Faith for Equality published a list of congregations welcoming to same-sex couples in various ways: sanctioning participation, performing marriages, and ordaining to the clergy, among others. Depending on your faith or beliefs, this list includes welcome places to practice.  The 7 Best Towns in Tennessee for LGBT Families is a list of the state's most gay-friendly places to live, including Nashville, Knoxville, and Memphis. Clarksville reigns as #1. 

Queer Facts The Tanco v. Haslam case ended up becoming part of the landmark US Supreme Court case Obergefell v. Hodges. Four couples (later three couples when one withdrew from the case) had been married in same-sex-legal states before moving to Tennessee, which did not legally recognize their same-sex marriages. Tennessee Judge Trauger ruled in favor of the plaintiffs but also ruled that 'the court's order does not open the floodgates for same-sex couples to marry in Tennessee . . . [and] applies only to the three same-sex couples at issue in this case.' The case did not allow other same-sex marriages to occur in the state of Tennessee. House Bill 600 was passed by the legislature and signed into law when people were focused on the “Don't Say Gay” bills of 2011 and 2013.

This bill invalidated all LGBT-inclusive municipal ordinances and prevented the enactment of new ones, mandating that no city could have a nondiscrimination law broader than the state's laws. The sponsors of the bill called it “pro-business and pro-taxpayer.” Attempts to nullify the law have been unsuccessful. Know Your Rights, also known as the LGBT Toolkit, is a helpful website that lists rights for any member of the LGBT community. Tennesseans are encouraged to take a look and read up on their rights. It is also a helpful guide for any information on changing legal names or genders and a great resource to report discrimination or violence against members of the community. https://lgbtrightstoolkit.org/tennessee-lgbt-rights-information/ A 67,000+ signature petition was delivered to lawmakers on April 18, 2016, asking them to veto Tennessee’s proposed bathroom legislation. Deliverers of the petition to the governor’s office included two Tennessee public high school students, Henry Seaton and Jennifer Guenst. Nearly 6,000 of the signers self-identified as clergy or people of faith when signing. The local ACLU of Tennessee was involved in this political action. 

Cite this page

Queer people in the United States are victims of hate crimes at a rate of two times more than Muslim or black people, four times that of Jews, and 14 times that of Latinos.[footnoteRef:1] The Lgbtq+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer or questioning, plus) community in America has been a people group that has fought for basic human rights to this day. Looking backwards on the triumphs and tragedies that this people group has reached and overcome, the most American expression of hardship, determination, and pride has been exemplified.

In the early 1950’s, during one of the most conservative time periods in the century, anti-communism was at the center of politician’s and people’s focus. But during this time one of the most calamitous and grievous homophobic policies was enacted by the United States Government, known as the “Lavender Scare”. This policy sought out and destroyed “suspected” queer people within the government; this policy made it illegal for queer people to work inside the government. “We have information that you are a homosexual. What do you have to say in your defense?” This was what was asked of employees of the government when they were on trial. This tragedy ravaged families and lives across the nation. But from the tragedy that befell this community they gained a new sense of determination to come into the light as a community.

As the entrance into the new decade came around there was a steady uprising of the queer community. In mid-1969 after a police raid on a well-known gay/lesbian bar resulted in unfair and discriminatory incarcerations, the queer community began to rise up. The raid of the Stonewall Inn lead to protests know as the Stonewall Riots. Many historians and people in the queer community look back on these riots as the first pride parade in history.[footnoteRef:4] The Stonewall Inn stands tall today as a proud queer bar and historical monument for the queer community. The amount of perseverance, conscientiousness, and tenacity portrayed and put forth by queer protesters and activist shows how American overcoming tragedy with triumph is.

Policies that target and seek to annihilate minority groups are not something that is new to this Nation. Lgbtq+ people have been told that a predisposition of who they love or identify as is a sin and something they can choose to change. Harmful rhetoric like this has only been enforced by government policies such as “Don’t ask, don’t tell” (DADT). In 1993, Bill Clinton passed a law known as DADT, this was a law that banned openly gay and lesbian individuals from serving in the United States Military and also tried to prohibit harassment of closeted individuals (individuals who are not open about their sexuality or gender orientation). This policy denied hundreds of thousands from serving their country to the full extent of their ability. Somehow a person’s sexual orientation was going to prohibited them from being just as good, or even better, of a soldier as the man, woman, or person standing next to them.

Three years after “Don’t ask, don’t tell” was enacted, Bill Clinton signed the “Defense of Marriage act”. Stating that marriage is “a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife”. Basic human rights were taken away from a peaceful minority group all because our heteronormative culture was fearful of difference and change. State and Church were supposed to be separated, but these words from the Holy Bible were used as bullets, “Thou shall not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it (is) abomination.”, “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood upon them.” This argument is what prohibited a man from marrying the man he loved, or two women from being legal guardians of their child and is responsible for the thousands of Lgbtq+ youth that commit suicide each year. 

Tragedy has consumed this community and somehow beauty and life have flourished. Life has poured into every crevice and found ways to inspire people to take a stand and make their voices be heard. Tragedy never crumpled hope. And hope is what led the fight for human rights. In August of 2010 Proposition 8, a law making same-sex marriage illegal, was found to be unlawful, September 2011 DADT was repealed, May 2012 Obama became the first president to publicly support queer people and months later the democratic party joined him, in November 2012 the first openly gay person was elected to US Senate, in June 2015 same-sex marriage was declared legal in all 50 states, and in June 2016 the Stonewall Inn became a national monument.[footnoteRef:11] Tragedy is still everywhere, we mourn for more than 20,000 people still in conversion therapy.[footnoteRef:12] We mourn for people in our community who have lost partners to AIDS, murder, and suicide. We mourn, but we also celebrate the lives of those people and the lives of the people around us. We protest and because of that we flourish.

Imagine being one of the first people to try and push against gender stereotypes and preconstructed ideas of what it means to be a man or a woman. Imagine the amount of strength it takes to put yourself in front of the firing squad that is composed of religion, press, lost friends and family, political platforms, police brutality, rape, homicide, and homelessness. Transgender or gender queer people in America are the biggest minority group to ever exist. Gender queer people are at the highest risk of sexual assault anywhere, have the highest rate of hate crimes committed against them, and have the most targeted systemic bias and transphobic practices committed against them. The term transgender came into use around 1990; a self-identified heterosexual cross-dresser named Virginia Prince is given a vast majority of credit with opening the flood gates for the trans community in the United States and a monumental figure that embodies overcoming tragedy and determination to fight for what is right and just.After all this time, after all the work put in by the transgender community, after all the progress that is thought to be made, innocent people are still being murdered. Christa Leigh Steele-Knudslien, Viccky Gutierrez, Celine Walker, Tonya Harvey, Zakaria Fry, Phylicia Mitchell, Amia Tyrae Berryman, Sasha Wall, Karla Patricia Flores-Pavon, Nino Fortson, Gigi Pierce, Roxana Hernandez, Antash’a English, Diamond Stephens, Cathalina Christina James, Kiesha Wells.[footnoteRef:14] These 16 names all belong to someone’s child, someone’s sibling, someone’s partner, someone’s parent. And someone got the dreaded phone call that this person they loved was shot, beaten, choked, abducted, stabbed, and/or burned.[footnoteRef:15] Death in the queer community has never been something new. You cannot walk into a designated queer nightclub without thinking that someone could walk through the front doors and open fire on you. The strength and courage that the queer community exudes, transgender or gender queer people especially, is one of the reasons that after all these years, after all these deaths, people continue to show up to Pride Parades and make sure their voices are heard.

AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome), and closer to home, AIDS has most commonly affected queer men who engage in sexual activity. In June 1981 Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that previously healthy men had contracted pneumonia and died. Looking back today more than a million Americans have died or have this virus. [footnoteRef:16] Not only has AIDS ravished the gay community but it also drove a divide within the community. Mark Harrington, a gay man who lived in San Francisco and New York during the peak of the AIDS epidemic, “And I felt like women were not as part of our community and I couldn’t tell if that was because of New York had always been like that, or was AIDS dividing up those groups?” Harrington was involved in a community that was actively fighting for allocated research on AIDS, known as ACT UP. In a specific interview he did in 2003, Harrington was reflecting on the difficulties within the Lgbtq+ community due to the horrific outbreak of AIDS among men. Not only was there division within the country because of AIDS, there was division within the queer community. The solidarity that gay men, in particular, faced could have shut this movement down. It could have forced them into a corner, barricaded them into a closet and left them there to die. Instead, the gay community stood up and forced their way into the light. “I felt very protected and part of a group” A sense of community is what flowed through the veins of these men who were faced with unimaginable terrors, and although AIDS is still a horrific tragedy within the United States, the gay community has persisted.“HIV by the Numbers: Facts, Statistics, and You.” 

I am a queer woman in the United States. I am white and due to preconceived stereotypes, I “appear” heterosexual; I recognize my privilege, and personally I am thankful. But, I keep my hair long. I don’t hold hands with girls in public. The only rainbow item I wear in public is a small bracelet. I try to hold my tongue when I hear homophobic remarks. These are my rules to live by so hopefully I do not get stabbed to death or raped due to my sexual orientation. I am a 17-year-old child. I have been told to die, told I am going to hell, told I do not deserve to breathe, called a faggot. My grandparents can’t make eye contact with me, my president jokes about hanging me.[footnoteRef:18] My best friend cannot come out due to the possibility of becoming homeless if her parents disown her. I look at the world and my community through eyes of fear and hope. I would never change who I am. Nor, would I change the journey the queer community has gone through. Tragedy and triumph come hand in hand; you cannot go through life with only triumph, because without enduring tragedy there is no goal to strive for. The Lgbtq+ community has fought battles so they can have jobs, buy houses, adopt children, not be tortured through conversion therapy, and be seen as human beings. When I think of an American story of tragedy and triumph the queer community has fought more battles than humanly possible and still keeps fighting to strive for a world where they are treated equally. This article written by the Human Rights Campaign is a quick summary about different Lgbtq+ activists groups evolved and fought for equality throughout American history. The article starts off by talking about the famous Stonewall Riot that is viewed by many as the “beginning” of the Lgbtq+ movement. Hate crimes were also at an all time high and the “Lavender Scare” also took place at this time. The “Lavender Scare” was a time where any government official who was suspected of being queer was fired because they were viewed as susceptible to Soviet blackmail. This article gives a broad and simplistic summary of major early queer movements in America.

I plan on using this website to create a baseline of information. I will go into more depth of the Stonewall Riots, and the effects of harmful government policies throughout history. This website will strengthen my paper because it adds information that is not too daunting or overwhelming to a reader who is glancing over my paper.

Cite this page

On June 27, 1969, a police raid at the Stonewall Inn in New York City resulted in rioting by more than 400 people in the streets outside the inn (Police Again Rout ‘Village’ Youths Outbreak by 400 Follows a Near-Riot Over Raid, 1969). The raid is said to have been due to the illegal sale of alcohol, but today it is widely known to have been a tactic of intimidation born of fear and prejudice against the LGBT community. The decades following what has come to be known as the Stonewall riots, have been a constant battle of ideals and politics in order for members of the LGBT community to obtain the same rights as their families, friends, and neighbors. Although there were several events before and after that played a role, the Stonewall Riots were the catalyst to the civil rights movement for the LGBT community that paved the way for LGBT individuals to obtain the right to marry the one they love. The tumultuous night of June 27, 1969 as police and rioters clashed, marked a turning point for the LGBT community. The injustices of law enforcement to the marginalized community was not ignored but was confronted with violence and rebuttal. This signaled a beginning of a movement. Proof of this movement brewing is shown by John Darnton (1973), as he describes the thousands of individuals that marched down Manhattan streets on June 25, 1973. With smiles and excitement these individuals chanted the slogan, “Out of the closets and into the streets” .

They were commemorating the Stonewall riots as the moment in history that the LGBT community refused to live in the shadows. This source is very important because it shows that what happened at the Stonewall Inn was the beginning of a movement that continued to last even through present times. Prior to 1969, there were few if any laws or ordinances on city books protecting members of the LGBT community. Today there are laws protecting these same individuals in many states and most major cities, but even in 1974, progress was being made. Judith Cummings (1974) shares examples of state legislatures and city councils adding protections to LGBT individuals. Key examples were anti-discrimination ordinances being approved in Columbus, Ohio; Seattle, Washington; East Lansing, Mich.; and Berkeley, CA. This is fundamental because it shows that when a few individuals stand up for what is right, and continue to do so year after year, people start to recognize the importance of their efforts and change begins to take place. From anti-discrimination ordinances, fast forward over forty years and the largest fruits of the labors stemming from the Stonewall Riots was finally achieved.

The right to marry was extended to all American citizens, regardless of sexual identity and orientation. According to Angela Glosser and Nicole Weller (2016), in their journal article, The Look of Pride: Examining the Social Movements of Stonewall, Windsor, and Obergefell, “The opportunities afforded him by the swing toward the majority of society favoring same-sex marriage, and a Supreme Court that finally had enough justices to rule on the side of equality, did not exist back in 1969.” This source shows that as a result of the Stonewall Riots, the sway of public opinion and a favorable Supreme Court allowed for equality that the LGBT and their allies had been trying to achieve, forty years in the making. The complexity of all these events can only be summarized in essay format and would require innumerous hours of research and thousands of pages of text to fully explore and develop. Each aspect that has been discussed in this essay has several underlying factors and areas of development in order to paint a larger picture of how events transpired. Such an exploration would leave much to be desired, considering the continual development and growth of the LGBT movement into the next decade. Adding to the complexity are the feelings and emotions of each member of the LGBT community, all of which are as unique as snowflakes and as measurable as grains of sand by the sea.

Maybe one day we can look back and fully understand the events of the last forty years, but for now, we must look to the future and ensure we do not repeat the mistakes of the past. The historical event of Stonewall is important to me personally as a member of the LGBT community. I chose the topic because my life has been changed and transformed for the better by those people who have sacrificed time and, in many cases, their well-being to help give me access to the rights I have today. I had heard of the Stonewall riots but was unaware of how big of an effect they had on the progress made for the LGBT community, especially the path to obtaining the right to marry. My historical research has changed the way I view the event because I now know that the process lasted more than 40 years and included members and advocates of the LGBT community who despised the way they were being treated. There are several ways a historian may pursue the growth of the LGBT community with a more complex analysis. First, the historian would analyze other events that occurred during the same time period as the Stonewall riots that may not have been as famous, but still impacted the beginning of the civil rights movement for the LGBT community. Second, the historian could research the progress made on a state-by-state basis to determine if a state other than New York had a greater impact on LGBT rights. Lastly, a historian may research deeper into the way politics influenced the progression, and at times hindered, the process.

Cite this page