[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 16 - Roadblocks to Global Sustainability

Discussion topic for Chapter16

What values and human cultural ideals stand in the way of rational decision making that would ensure the survival or sustainability of the world more or less as we know it today?

Student Response

The values and ideals most likely to prevent rational decision making regarding our future survival are those of ethnocentrism and the push for industrialized globalization. Nowhere is it more evident than in the way that developing countries are pushed to comply with “modern Western” agricultural practices, even in the face of scientific proof that those very methods deplete the land of its capability to produce food stuff of nutritive substance.

We, to mean world leaders and multinational megacorporations, require adherence to practices that leave the individual farmer (or herder) without a real increase in monetary wealth, as they are forced to adhere to ever-increasing demands for new equipment or chemicals so their product meets “industrialized standard”. These requirements are costly, often causing the farmer to have to go into debt to meet them or risk losing any subsidies they might be receiving.

Modern doesn’t always mean “better” in cases like this. Yes, we have immediate access to technological devices that allow us to communicate across the globe almost instantly. Yes, we have cars that allow us to work at further distances from our home. But do these things actually increase the quality of our lives in the long-term? Rarely, does the benefit outweigh the cost. We – in our superior modern lifestyles – pollute the atmosphere every time we get into that car to drive to that fast food joint to pick up convenience foods that pollute our bodies, the food having been raised on land that must be artificially made viable for renewable growth, with chemicals that pollute our water supply when it rains.

And that’s just one example. To achieve existence in harmony with our environment, we will need to put aside the belief (taught in childhood) that everything “modern” is better. We need to look to other cultures and to take a good hard look at our own, to determine how we can adapt toward a globalized culture without destroying the planet (and its peoples) in getting there.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 14 - Spirituality & Religion in Art

Discussion topic for Chapter 14
Reflecting back on the three topics in Chapter 13 , "Spirituality, Religion and the Supernatural", give at least three examples of art forms that are connected to these three topics.

Student Response
Tribal masks hung as wall art, marble statuary, jewelry made from precious metals and gemstones, and song. Each of these is an example of paranormal tradition that that have gained social acceptance in the realm of modern-world art consumers.

Masks are used in many cultures for a variety of reasons. From the Kabuki masks and Dragon masks of Ancient China and Japan, to the tribal masks of African or American natives, each has a purposed based in the spiritual practices of its people. Some are intended to provoke a fear response in enemies, or to invoke spirit beings that will stand as guardian to the forces being faced. They are believed, within their society, to be symbolic of great power. As art, they are hung in homes or businesses to enhance appearance of the property – chosen for color scheme or placed with other masks in an arrangement that is aesthetically pleasing but with little or no regard to the notion of spirits invoked.

In several areas of Europe, it was common practice for families to have small representations of the god(s) they worshipped. They would care for these idols or make offerings to them in worship, believing that their gods would grant them protection or succor, in return for their devotion. As Christianity spread throughout the land, church leaders would commission representations of their “saints”. These saints, in an effort by the church to subsume the “heathen” relations, often bore physical or aspect relation to the local deities they were replacing, to make forced conversion to the state religion more palatable. These statues were housed in the church building, as a way to encourage attendance (so the common man could still worship what was familiar but would hear about them within context of the priest’s sermons). Today, museums fight for the privilege of housing pieces created by the renowned artisans of that period, seeking to educate the public on both the craftsmanship involved and the politics surrounding each piece.

Jewelry has been worn throughout recorded history by religious and occult practitioners. Similar to the belief regarding masks, they believe that certain metals and gems hold supernatural properties, and that wearing them on the body can allow that person to access or benefit from those properties. One needs look no further than your local drug store (copper or magnetic bracelets) or night club (ankhs and crosses) or for examples of the wide-scale acceptance as art form of this supernatural practice.

Song crosses the boundaries of all three – whether chants, melodies, or wordless tunes. It allows people, individually or as a group, to express their feelings on these topics in a way that connects powerfully for them on a personal level. In popular culture today, this tradition has been commercialized to the point that production values and revenue generation are (unfortunately) more often important than any message the artist might be trying to communicate through song.

[GPC-ANTH] Magazine Article Review

Extra Credit #5, Summary and Review of the Delta Sky Magazine article on Jane Goodall and Earth Day Activism

The cover article for the April 2010 issue of Delta Sky Magazine starts with an overview of the origins of Earth Day and goes on to spotlight activities and outlooks of some of the most well-known ecological activists in our modern world. In addition to Ms. Jane Goodall, the article also features sections on Robert Redford, Shai Agassi, Dr. Sylvia Earle, Ted Danson, Dr. M. Sanjavan, Julia Louis-Dreyfus, and a page of Full Disclosure statistics on “the challenges facing our land, air, and water” today.

The information on Ms. Goodall shows that she is far more than “just a monkey lady”, talking about her work as an author of several books and in founding both the TACARE and the Roots and Shoots conservationist and ecological awareness programs. It talks of other accomplishments of hers, such as being the only known invited speaker to North Korea to not have it required that their speech be pre-audited for approval and of the informal honorific title of “eco-warrior” she has earned due to her dedication in this arena. Though the article speaks of her being flattered by the sentiment, it also offers her counterpoint message as one of hope in education and socially instinctive activism by all, rather than one of violence.

In highlighting the other ecology activists – scientists, celebrities, artists, among others - this article demonstrates that they are people of passion, compassion, and action. It tells of the organizations they have helped found or to whom they belong, that are making a very real impact on ecology legislation and world-wide conservation practices. Website addresses are provided for these organizations, so readers who are interested in preserving our natural resources have a place to start.

The page on Dr. Sanjavan and the final page of the article were, for me, perhaps the most enlightening as a call to action. Solid facts are presented about the way we, as a society, contribute to the depletion of our natural resources and the steps we can take – today – to slow the impending ecological and societal crises we face if our habits do not change.

On a side note … the article came up in the circulating title spot of the provided link, offering to show us some pictures of this amazing lady before moving on to the scanned pages of the magazine, itself. In reading through the image captions for “Behind the Scenes of the Photo Shoot”, it really drove home for me how much of life in our society is staged for palatable perfection. Her work is so critical to our understanding of so many things about our way of life and how it evolved that, I guess, it saddens me to realize that, in a cover article for Earth Day, they chose to showcase her in a falsified mock-up rather than in an actual botanical setting.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 12 - Politics in Egalitarian Societies

Discussion topic for Chapter12
Given the basic definition of politics presented in the beginning of this chapter, why do you think that power in egalitarian societies plays a relatively insignificant role?

Student Response

The term political organization is defined in our textbook as “The way power is distributed and embedded in society; the means through which a society creates and maintains social order.” Power, as it relates to politics and societies, is defined as “the ability of individuals or groups to impose their will upon others and make them do things even against their own wants or wishes”.

In societies where individuals are regarded as more-or-less equal in social stature, there is a tendency to dilute political power bases to prevent instances of real or perceived oppression. We are given choice in where we live, and the type of work we do, even the manner in which we voice disapproval of our government’s actions on our behalf. Almost every aspect of life in an egalitarian society is held to be a right of the individual, not just a privilege. We grant a measure of power to some members of society, but we hold tight to that grant, never letting them forget that we are just as happy to take it away (whether through bureaucratic legalities or social defamation) if they fail in their responsibility to our shared trust.

This is not the case in stratified societies. In societies where the cultural structure is rigidly defined, however, those in positions of power do not allow dispute of that authority. State-sanctioned prosecution, restriction of personal rights, confiscation of wealth or lands – even death – are what await individuals that find public fault with the system or who seek to step outside their social boundaries.

There is a movie in which a group of Grasshoppers hold social power over a nest of Ants. The grasshoppers are not part of the ant’s governing body but, because they are seen as bigger, stronger, and are willing to inflict brutalities upon ants to get their way, they are able to dictate the social order on the island where both “tribes” live. During a crucial scene, there is a speech by the leader of the band of political bullies. The words he speaks are absolutely chilling in their clarity of vision regarding the real world politics of various cultures today.

“You let one ant stand up to us, then they all might stand up! Those puny little ants outnumber us a hundred to one and if they ever figure that out there goes our way of life! It's not about food, it's about keeping those ants in line. That's why we're going back! Does anybody else wanna stay? … Let's ride!”
--- “Hopper”, A Bug's Life

This sentiment is a key marker of political oppression. Power is held by a few, through violence most often-supported by religion or legislation. This type of oppression is less likely to occur in egalitarian societies because of the people’s general refusal to live life under others’ terms.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 10 - Honor Killings

Discussion topic for Chapter 10
Why did Honor Killing fit into the culture of some cultures as they emerged? Although the original conditions do not continue to exist, why does Honor Killing continue?

Student Response
Property rights and restitution. That is what it all boils down to.

Oftentimes in strictly traditional patrilineal societies, women are valued as property first and as thinking human beings second. They are a resource belonging to the family, rather than an individual with her own rights and privileges. It is a viewpoint that is strange to our modern Western society, but within that culture, it has come to be the norm.

Overall, people take offense when something they treasure is threatened or destroyed. Throughout recorded history there have been a vast range of small- and large-scale socio-political conflicts that, in essence, boil down to “he touched my stuff”. Each society, over time, develops some sort of conflict resolution system to ensure that the party wronged has a chance to recoup what was lost, gauging the punishment to the perceived severity of social infraction within that culture.

In the United States, where we truly do enjoy our materialist ways but do not (on the whole) believe theft or defamation to be a killing offense, this involves arrest and conviction for criminal violation with victims hoping for (eventual) financial restitution. In some parts of the world, we find in place various systems of indentured servitude or slavery for criminals that breach their culture’s property code. And in many countries of the Mideast, there is the custom of Honor Killings.

If you take a resource belonging to a man, you are saying, in essence, that he is too weak to protect that resource for use by his family; that the resources through which he provides for his family are outside the scope of his management. You impugn his very role within his society. In cultures where Honor Killings are the custom, that insult must be answered in a way that proves to the community that he is capable of taking care of his property and responsibility. By publicly eliminating the offender and the tainted resource from the gene pool, it makes a very clear statement that he is more than capable of managing his family’s affairs.

A friend joked with me when I told her of this assignment, likening some of our country’s entertainment habits to this practice. We laughed about the thought of an appearance on Jerry Springer as an Honor Killing, but these two things do share many of the same characteristics: Ritualism (care of the weapon and manner of execution for HKs, and time of day and formulaic scripting of the situation on TV), Public Viewing of the execution, and Death of the offender/Vindication of the Offended (physical death, and social death).

It was in interesting parallel to consider, and leaves me with the thought that our own society is not so far removed from “barbarism” as we might like ourselves to believe.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 8 - Anthropology & Economic Globalization

Discussion topic for Chapter 8
What is the contribution of anthropology to understanding and implementing economic globalization?


Student Response
Anthropology allows us to understand the context of an economy system against the backdrop of the culture that practices it, regardless of the commodity’s worth or trade values as perceived by external cultures.

When we look at the marketing practices of indigenous peoples or hunter-gather societies, we are tempted to think of them “wasting time trading worthless junk” when we may not understand the cultural significance or ecological value a given item may have. We perceive it only within the context of our own economy, as that is the sum of our own experience. Anthropology strips that away, however, by giving us the how and the why of individual systems, on their own merits.

In forcing us to take a step back to observe the transactions that are taking place at and below the surface, we can gain a better understanding of the things held dear to any given society. In rooting down to the underlying reasons for their practices, we can see that “primitive” economies are often more inclusive of the society’s customs and needs than our own “sophisticated” system of trading bits of paper and metal for everything else.

In these other culturally supporting economic systems, we see the significance placed on familial relations – as in the case of banana leaf bundles and yam banks of the Trobriands, where it boils down to the man supporting his wife’s need for funereal payments within the greater group. Or the importance of good relations between labor or regional groups – as seen in the tradition of pots of millet beer shared by workers at the end of a day in East Africa or in the giving and receiving of soulava and mwali in the Kuli Ring of the South Pacific.

Though it seems strange to us – in our modern world of political gift giving and funding life via credit – these systems work to keep their society stable. Without the work of anthropologists dedicated to supporting the integrity of these oh-so-different cultures, there could be another push to eradicate their systems in the name of “global progress”, as occurred during the previous era of colonialisation.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 6 - Gender, as a Cultural Construct

Discussion topic for Chapter 6
Margaret Mead's cross-cultural research on gender relations suggests that male dominance is a cultural construct and, consequently, that alternative gender arrangements can be created. Looking at your grandparents, parents, and siblings, do you see any changes in your own family? What about your own community? Do you think such changes are positive?

Student Response

Changes in socio-cultural trending are such a tricky thing to define when the society being asked about is in the middle of the change. Trends, and changes within those trends, occur on all levels – seeming simultaneous and at odds with itself all at once.

“Women are knocking holes in the glass ceiling and coming through.” “Men are letting women take their rightful place as equals in the workforce.” These are the sort of things we hear on the news all the time. Words are pretty, but they speak of a deeper reality for our current culture. The underlying tone of these words is all too often silently interpreted as, “If you were supposed to be here, the ceiling wouldn’t exist” and “the only reason you’re standing where you are is because we LET you stand here”. I see evidence of this every day in watching the businessmen and women with whom I interact. The glances they give when backs are turned and the things they say when they feel they are unobserved tell such a vastly different story than the sugar-coated future-as-now hope our media would like us to believe.

We live the change in several areas of our personal lives – matriarchal dominance of extended family units in various ethnic groupings, fathers choosing to become the primary caregiver in select suburban families – but we, as a society, do not support it in our entertainment or in our self-governance. Even the words of other students on this topic show that we are still closed-off from accepting gender equality on a societal level. For example: the idea that a mother’s love is somehow more pure or beneficial than the love a father could give. Direct nutrition? Yes, only a biological female can supply that, but parents of both sexes are capable of cultural nurturing.

We want change because we can logically see it as beneficial to our society as a whole, just as our society would benefit from an acceptance that “race” does not scientifically exist, but we have yet to embrace that change so it becomes an intrinsic part of our daily lives.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 4 - Race, as a Cultural Construct

Discussion topic for Chapter 4
How is the concept of "race" a cultural construct and why do we still hear the term used?


Student Response
From our textbook, the term race is scientifically and anthropologically defined as follows: “In biology, a subgroup within a species, not scientifically applicable to humans because there exist no subspecies within modern Homo sapiens.”

The concept of “race” as we have come to understand it is a cultural construct rather than a scientifically-supported biological one. Renaissance and Industrial era researchers tried to understand and classify the world in which we live. They assigned racial delineations according to the accepted scientific methods of the time – most often (and now we know, incorrectly) assigning racially defining categories based simply on where a people lived or the single differentiator of skin color. As science progressed as a formal educational discipline, it became clear that we are all part of the same species and genus, and that no true variant subspecies exist within our shared biological classification.

As has been common practice throughout recorded history, politicians and religious leaders used these classifications to benefit their needs, encouraging the acceptance of these classifications as a way of reinforcing ethnic superiority of their own culture over that of societies and cultures that possessed resources they desired. Just as ancient Egyptians and Mesopotamians, American natives on both continents, and African tribal leaders dealt in slavery of their own and surrounding peoples, so too did the Western Europeans use “the inferiority of savage races” to justify these practices as colonial expansion brought them to the “New World”.

Unfortunately, we will continue to hear this term incorrectly used as long as it is politically expedient for our governmental and societal leaders, worldwide, to exploit language for their political and monetary needs.

[GPC-ANTH] Discussion Topic for Chapter 2 - Ethnocentrism

Discussion topic for Chapter 2

Although all cultures across the world display some degree of ethnocentrism, some are more ethnocentric than others. In what ways is your own society ethnocentric? Considering the modern fact of globalization (as described in Chapter 1) do you think ethnocentrism poses more of a problem in today's world than in the past?

Student Response

American society is ethnocentric in several ways, each more so as scope of consideration is reduced by practical societal level – national, statewide, community, etc. We proclaim ourselves as a nation of outcasts and visionaries that carved life out of the hard wilderness to create a place we could embrace life on our own terms. (Yes, there is far more to it than that. This is purposeful condensation of that reality for sake of conversational brevity.) We are loudly proud that we are a great melting pot, a nation that welcomes all and holds no one person greater than another.

But we do.

There is an underlying “Us, not Them” mentality that pervades American social structures– a taught belief that everything we do and produce is better – our military, our cars, our sports teams and political structures. There is a bias perpetuated against other people by those attempting to justify their place in the hierarchy. The term “foreigner” has become a curse word, of sorts, in some parts of the country, used to belittle or cast aspersions on a “blame group”, to set them apart as somehow inferior or incapable, rather than as a simple statement of “from somewhere else”.

Our ethnocentrism also manifests negatively as racial tensions among groups of people, regardless of economic standing or residential locale This ethnocentric bias breaks apart on the smallest societal level where individuals actually are in close proximity and work together one-on-one. It is only on the larger scale where it becomes an effective weapon in the hands of charismatic individuals.

Our national and racial “home team” attitudes pose a legitimate threat to our participation in a global society. We can say all we like that we have overcome differences, that we’ve “grown-up” and “learned lessons” from our sometimes violent national history. Nevertheless, our actions as we treat with each other speak louder than our words ever will. You cannot keep a man’s trust – nor make globally beneficial progress – if you offer him a beer in one hand while penning a curse of his heritage with the other.