The Politics of Language Lecture (#3)

Another lecture I really enjoyed this year was the lecture by Teresa Satterfield on Spanish linguistics. I thought this was a great lecture for several reasons;

1. Professor Satterfield was a fun, funny, and interesting lecturer.

I thought she was one of the best lecturers we have had all year, and I got the feeling that most people liked her as well. She was a good speaker and she kept the lecture, which had the potential to be sleep invoking, lively, interesting, and relaxed. It was easy to understand her, and he slides were easy to follow as well as easy to takes notes on.

2. The material, despite initially sounding boring, was actually quite intriguing.

When I saw that she was going to be speaking about linguistics, I was thinking, "Oh great! A lecture on linguistics!", but after learning more about linguistics, I found that it was actually pretty cool. For example, I really liked her discussion on children learning multiple languages. I find it amazing that kids can learn 5 languages at once, and it is also fascinating how the father has to speak the minority language in order for the child to comprehend it easier. It almost like kids have an inherent patriarchal mindset, which is something I didn't know linguistics studied.

3. Her stories and personal references made the lecture more meaningful.

I really like her stories, and she was so funny telling them. It made the lecture hit home more when she told stories about her encounters with matters relating to linguistics, like the story about when she was in the super market and the little Latino boy was talking to her in Spanish, and he said, "Mom, this black lady is speaking Spanish!" and she told him that anyone could speak Spanish. She also brought in her brother, who doesn't speak Spanish, and how that related to Linguistics issues as well. The discussion on Regaeton was also very cool, because of how the Spanish language is almost evolving because of its interaction between different groups of people.

Overall, I thought it was an outstanding lecture and I learned a lot from it, and it also gave me a greater perspective of language. It definitely gave me some motivation to take one of her classes.

Cuban Immigrants (#2)

When Silvia Pedraza first came in, I thought it was going to be another boring history lecture, but I quickly realized that she was actually an interesting lecturer, and she was presenting some fascinating information about Cuba that I had never heard before. I found that she was funny, and a good story teller, and unlike some lecturers, she had my attention for the entire time. I was really intrigued by her personal involvement in the first wave, and how she was in that national magazine. I thought it was really easy to retain information from her lecture as well, because although her slides did not have all the information on them, they had the main points so I was easily able to follow along and take good notes from her lecture.

One thing I really liked from her lecture was some of the things she said about Fidel Castro and communism. I agree with her political stances against communsim, and really appreciated her vigorous assault of it, but one thing I found interesting was what she said about Fidel. I never knew the backstory of Fidel, so I found it interesting that he was a charismatic soldier who gained support from the people by fighting their former dictator. She also said that even after he announced that he was communist the people still loved him because he was charismatic and a good speaker and leader. She said that throughout history men have been able to lead people with these character qualities and abilities, even though they could be a communist or a dictator. She drew reference to Hitler and the way he captivated the German people to do his will. I think she makes a good point on this, and I believe people are to easily influenced by charisma and good speeches, and we should try to trust our own beliefs instead of being influenced by the influential.

Obama's Cabitnet (3rd Post)

I want to point out a recent article I came across which talks about Obama's Cabinet. You can access the link here:http://chinadaily.com.cn/world/2008-11/23/content_7231295.htm
The article gives the list of current appointees to Obama's Cabinet and some of the front-runners for positions still to be filled. I am bringing this article up for two different purposes.

1: What happened to Bill Richardson (a Latino) who never pulled through with his bid for the Presidency?

2: How will immigration policy be formed under the Obama administration?

Commerce Secretary
-- New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson is expected to be tapped as secretary of commerce, NBC News reported.
Richardson, a former United Nations ambassador and energy secretary during President Bill Clinton's administration, had been an early supporter of Obama after dropping his own presidential ambitions.
If confirmed, Richardson's appointment would make him the first high-profile Hispanic leader in the Obama Cabinet.

This appointment would make Bill Richardson the most influential political leader for the next four years. Here's a Youtube video which adequately explains his background:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-EnOE3UNhg


Homeland Security
-- Janet Napolitano, the Democratic governor of Arizona, is under consideration to head the US Homeland Security Department, a sprawling agency formed to bolster civil defense following the September 11 attacks. "She's in the mix. She may be the front-runner," a Democratic official said. Napolitano, 50, is a former US attorney for Arizona and state attorney general, giving her law enforcement experience and is as governor of a state bordering Mexico, she also is closely involved in immigration issues which also come under the Homeland Security Department's purview.

I personally endorse Napolitano for Secretary of Homeland Security. I remember back about 2 years ago when there was some bogus legislation about building a border-fence along the ENTIRE U.S./Mexico boarder she was a main voice against the building of such a fense. She was also famously quoted for saying "You show me a 50-foot wall and I'll show you a 51-foot ladder."

To be consistent, here's some Youtube content for Napolitano:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ieLhFrqfqBg

What do you think about these candidates? Are there any other candidates which you would think largely interact with Latin@s and thier political issues?

Discussion questions for Friday the 20th

Latino Leadership Development

1. What is a community leader/ how is this role obtained?

2. As highlighted in the text what is one of the Latino populations biggest obstacles/ weakness?

3. What laws furthered the false notion that Latinos were/ are a threat to the well being of the nation?

4. Why are student organizations so important?

Young People as competent citizens 

5. What are some common misleading images of young people of color according to the media, social science and professional practice? 

6. Can you explain the reasoning behind the national homicide rate falling 20% and the coverage on youth homicide increasing by 721% on television network news program?S Why are these statistics dangerous?

7. What do you think is the most beneficial outcome from youth participation?

8. What are some obstacles for youth participation in community change?

9. Why do you think american society views youth as victims or problems rather than as competent citizens?

10. Why is population change significant when discussing the themes of civic engagement and civic disengagement?

Reflection Post 3 - Fishbowl Observations

The reason I have chosen to write my final reflection post on the Fishbowl discussion we had in last weeks discussion (11/14), is because I actually believe that this type of discussion is more beneficial to discussion section, despite what many others in discussion thought.  I know that many of you thought that the fishbowl disengaged more people than it did engage but I don't necessarily think the positives and negatives can be seen so "black and white".

First of all, the students in the middle of the fishbowl are obviously engaged if they are being forced to discuss amongst a smaller group of people.  Secondly, the notes/observations that we were to keep track of really helped the "outsiders" stay in the loop and what not.

The first question on "Discourse - What was being said?" was beneficial because as I took notes from the outside, I felt as if I were in a mini-lecture.  I don't know how others feel about this statement, but I actually like the "teacher lectures and the student takes notes" model.  So for me to sit on the outside and observe what was being said on the inside, actually engaged me as I took notes on relevant information.  Furthermore, I know that when I was in the inside of the circle, it felt good to be one of those contributing and answering questions.  I think that for students who are good note-takers, this is a very easy way of learning.  Some examples of the information I took away from the outside are: 1) One group discussed a study which involved observing Latino children/teenagers in and out of the classroom.  Those in the inside talked about how Latinos may interact with one another as well as others in a public setting (i.e. - the scenario in the mall).  Furthermore, they discussed several research methods and how to infer data from observations.  2) The other group I observed talked about the Fishbowl itself and whether or not it brought advantages/disadvantages to our ways of learning/discussing during discussion section.  Some commonly held views held were against the Fishbowl because of the awkwardness that may have arisen, as well as the disconnect that some students felt from the outside.  Some felt severely disconnected and disadvantaged from not being able to contribute while not in the inner circle.  However, as I stated earlier, I do not believe this to be a severe negative.  Overall, I believe the inner circle can help because it engages those who are otherwise quiet throughout the entire discussion section.

Furthermore, not to knock anyone, but while observing we were asked to observe "Positionality/Identities - Who are the people you are observing?" While jotting down thoughts on this question, I found that their were certain peoples thoughts that I really appreciated and trusted while others may have been less thought out.  I definitely gained a sense of who was knowledgeable on the subject.

Lastly, we were asked to observe "Space and Time - What type of space have we created today" as well as any other additional observations.  While writing down comments on these criteria, I observed the different sectors that the fishbowl created and I judged whether or not I was in favor of the fishbowl discussion.  My thoughts on this were: By putting people in the middle, they were definitely on the spot.  They were responsible for answering all the questions on their topic.  For me, this definitely made me feel more comfortable, despite the fact that people were observing us and taking notes.  This is definitely different for our class setting as we usually only a select few are engaged in the discussion.  Although I was in favor of the fishbowl, I definitely won't disregard the fact that it may not be as beneficial to all as it was to myself  The different setup may have connected some people while disconnecting others.

Just in case you couldn't tell my stance on the Fishbowl, I enjoyed it and felt very comfortable in the inner circle, participating quite a lot.  Although I had no previous experience, I was very engaged as I enjoy responding to questions in group discussions.

Reflection Post 2 - A Day Without A Mexican

"A Day Without A Mexican" was very appealing to my likes because I really appreciate the idea of taking serious and relevant information and making it into a parody.  During high school, I absolutely hated politics, but once I was introduced to Jon Stewart, I grew quite a liking.  Furthermore, shows such as South Park, Family Guy, and The Simpsons, even manage to incorporate satire into their shows.  To me, this is the best way of informing people of serious issues because people like comedy and the arena that these rather boring political issues are brought into changes my whole perspective on my ability to withstand such issues.

Tying satire back into the film screening, there were many key points to be taken away.  Although the introduction begins with a woman waking up flustered as she does not know where her Mexican husband has left too, the dramatization sets the tone for what is to be an informative parody on immigration issues currently taking place in the U.S.  

The main purpose of the film was to portray how the U.S. economy would be deeply affected if the U.S. were to eliminate illegal immigrants.  However, the film points to the work these immigrants do and how their contributions without a doubt outweigh the "cons" of allowing immigrants into our country, specifically Latino immigrants.  Although the film touches on aspects of Latino contributions, it makes note that in whatever case, immigrants in this country are not as derogatory as they are helpful.

On a final note, whatever the scene may be, the points to be made were that without immigrants, and specifically Mexicans, the economy would be seriously hurt.  Despite controversy over "illegals taking Americans jobs," the film shows how the economy is very well off distributing the jobs they do to these hard-working immigrants.  Whether by calling these illegals, "aliens" or calling a Honduran or Guatemalan a Mexican, the film addresses these issues by showing the widespread ignorance of Americans, specifically in California, who fail to see the large contribution that these immigrants make to the U.S on a daily basis.  Contrary to popular belief, without their contributions, Americans probably would not fill the void to be left from eliminating these immigrants. 

On that note, I would like to conclude by mentioning one last time how effective satire/parody is in the academic arena.  I specifically found "A Day Without A Mexican" to be very informative and a lot more interesting for the way the ideas were presented.  I strongly believe that films should be introduced to all courses in this manner.  By presenting important issues is a satirical manner, helpful, interesting knowledge can easily be attained. 

Reflection Post 3-"A Day Without a Mexican"

About three years ago my sister, our friends, and myself were walking through a video store trying to pick a movie to watch that night.  After searching and searching my friend stumbled upon "A Day Without a Mexican", initially when we all saw this we couldn't stop laughing because it honestly felt like a joke.  My sister and I picked the movie, telling our friends jokingly that "they will learn to respect us!".  After watching it back then I kind of just took it as a funny, satirical movie.  I still to this day find it amusing but also that there is a message behind all the "jokes" of labor, LA traffic, etc.  

As we have learned through out this course and I am sure as many of us have heard within the past couple of years, there is this idea that Mexicans, or Latinos, are taking all the jobs from "hard-working Americans" and the Latinos are hurting our economy.  However, it seems that people tend to look over the little fact that these "illegal aliens" are doing all the jobs no one would ever really want to do; however, this doesn't make it right for their mistreatment with wages and what not.  Nonetheless, people tend to not see how the Latino population, especially the undocumented immigrant, is a huge driving force not just in California's economy but in the United States economy.  

I love how the movie showed that Latinos contribute a lot to society, more than those would want you to think that is.  Also, I must say I was a little disappointed that no one was laughing at some parts in the movie.  I don't know if it was because you didn't want to be there or for some other reason.  Or maybe I thought it was funny because of the connection to LA with its traffic and tremendous Latino population.  Either way, I really liked this movie for both its message and humor.  Its nice to learn something and also get a kick out of it too.

Discussion Questions for 21 November

Hey all,

These are my discussion questions for the film "A Day Without a Mexican" and the article "Raquachismo: A Chicano Sensibility." These questions will be used on Friday.

A DAY WITHOUT A MEXICAN:

1. What is a farce? How is this film a farce?
2. What are the different views expressed about hiring undocumented/Latino workers? (Think about the Senator, the Farmer, the TV News Manager, and others).
3. What does the Orange Farmer say to the reporter about Mexican field workers in California? Do you agree with this statement?
4. What are the different plays on group names used by non-Latino characters? Why did the filmmakers include this aspect in the film?
5. What is the contrast between the demonstrations at the beginning of the film and those toward the end of the film? Do you think that sort of change would actually occur? Why or why not?
6. What idea does the film ring up about a person’s cultural identity? Do you agree? Why or why not?

RASQUACHISMO: A CHICANO SENSIBILITY

1. What is rasquachismo? (p. 477) How can this ideal help or hurt Chicano empowerment?
2. What examples does Ybarra-Frausto give to differentiate between Medio (Low) Rasquachismo and Muy (High) Rasquachismo? What does this say about the concept of Rasquachismo?
3. What are the three characteristics of Rasquachismo that Ybarra-Frausto points out? (p. 478).
4. How did the described man from “Barrio Loma Linda” personify Rasquachismo? (P. 479).
5. What is the idea of “hacer rendir las cosas”? What are the examples that Ybarra-Frausto gives? (P. 479)
6. What does Ybarra-Frausto claim to be the origins of Rasquachismo? How is this right? How has Rasquachismo changed since its inception?
7. How does the excerpt from the carpa show on page 480 reflect the idea of Rasquachismo?
8. What was the reaction to Rasquachismo by those in the Chicano Movement? In contrast, how did “more traditional” Mexicans react to the term “Chicano”?
9. How did actos both celebrate and break through the idea of Rasquachismo?
10. How do figures 5 & 6 on page 483 reflect the idea of Rasquachismo?

See you all Friday,
Mark Navarro

Reflection #2

jhdguas

Fishbowl!

Hi everyone!
I wanted to thank you, again for participating in Friday’s fishbowl discussion. As promised, I will sum up some of the points I made at the end of class. Please use this space to provide additional feedback, reflections, and observations on your experience with this activity.

In answering the question, What type of space did we create/participate in on Friday’s discussion section?, I proposed the following observations based on Elizabeth Moje’s article, “Powerful Spaces: Tracing the Out-of-School Literacy Spaces of Latina/o Youth:”

A space influenced by institutions: we are at the University of Michigan, which implies a relationship between UM and education/learning

A space influenced by time/temporality: our discussion section length (50 mins); but also, how did your observations/comments in class differ from what you may have thought at the beginning of the semester? Or, how have you changed based on your experience in this class?

A space influenced by things material/physical: your level of comfort varied (depending on whether you were in the inner circle or outer circle); differences between being an “observer” vs. being the “observed.”

A space influenced by identities: how was our space complicated by identity? Which identities did you prioritize? What assumptions were you making about other people’s identities? Which identities were less obvious or not really addressed?

A space influenced by power: your relationship to each other and to me (GSI vs. student); what other power dynamics did you observe? How do these power dynamics affect your participation in class?

Also keep in mind that these categories often overlap.

I look forward to reading your responses!
-Isabel

Discussion Questions

Here are the discussion questions for Friday based on "Powerful Spaces"

1. How was this experiment conducted?
2. What kind of researcher is Professor Moje and what does that mean?
3. What is a space?
4. What does Professor Moje mean by having people’s identities varying based on time and space?
5. How is this applied to Latinos and what we have talked about before, examples?
6. When the youth took a trip outside of their community, how did they classify the other neighborhoods?
7. What are people’s reactions when someone of the Latino community starts to spend time with people of a different space?
8. What are your feelings on that?
9. At the mall what were people’s reactions so see Moje with a large group of Latino youth?
10. How did the youth themselves comment and judge others?
11. What does it mean to be “other” and be “othered”?
12. What are the characteristics of Virnot Street and why is it important?
13. How is it related to Aztlan?
14. What are the advantages of a virtual (internet) space?

Discussion Questions for Friday- Latinos and Well-Being

Here are some of the discussion questions for Friday based on the reading:

- How have the number of child abuse and neglect reports and out-of-home care changed over the past decade? How many of these are children of color?

-What are some of the factors that contributed to the increase of child abuse/neglect reports?

-What about the number of children entering out-of-home care?

-Why is the term "Latino" a problem in child welfare studies?

-What are some of the main differences between welfare assistance assessment of ethnic children and Caucasian children?

-How do you think it can be changed/remedied?

-How has the role/composition of the Latino family changed?

-What issues to they face?

-How do the authors pose some systematic solutions to those changes?

-What are the authors' overall feelings on child welfare for Latinos?

-How do they think that it can be improved?

-In what way does having immigrant parents affect the children?

-Who are the first people that Latinos go to when they see that a child has strange marks/bruises?

-What is the general opinion that Latinos have on child abuse within Latino homes?

-What are the implications of taking away a child from their Latino home?

Reflection Post 2

Listening to the past few guest lecturers have given me some things to think about that I find pretty interesting. More specifically, because I'm taking a linguistics class that Professor Satterfield teaches, I want to comment on her lecture a little bit.

I found a lot of things that she talked about similar to the topics that we cover in her class. One thing I found particularly interesting was the theory of code switching, and how some people criticize those who use code switching frequently, deeming them "ni-lingual", which I find completely untrue and unfounded. I feel to be able to code switch while maintaining both forms of grammar for each language is really an acquired skill- I would love to be able to seamlessly code-switch at some point. These bilingual speakers (because I believe that they are bilingual) will become increasingly more pertinent to our society, no matter how monolingual the government tries to make this country.

Another thing that I found interesting that was just commented on was the concept that the third generation of native speakers no longer knew how to speak Spanish fluently. This was also applied to my grandfather. His mother was Spanish and Mexican, and spoke fluently, but as he was growing up, he was taught to not speak Spanish, because that meant that he would be discriminated against, and I believe that he carried that train of thought with him throughout his entire life. None of my aunts and uncles or my mom know how to speak Spanish, and I remember my mom telling me that I could try speaking Spanish with my grandfather, but not to get my hopes up, because he has always associated speaking Spanish with a negative connotation. Seeing some of the things brought up in lecture apply to situations that I have experienced is really interesting, and makes these issues that more relevant for us to learn.

On Learning Spanish in the United States (A Reflection of My Mother)

I wish to reflect upon the act of speaking Spanish here in the United States.  Listening to Monday's lecture, I was reminded of my own family: My Grandparents are natives of Mexico and Southern Texas, both using Spanish as their primary language.  The first three of their four children were all expected to learn and use Spanish in the home and to use English outside of the home.  Then my mother, the last of the four children, was taught only English.  To this day, my mother speaks very little Spanish.  I began to wonder why.  Why, after having three completely bilingual children did my grandparents only teach my mother English?  Even more so, why did they only teach her their secondary language?

After several attempts over the years to get an answer from my mother (out of my strange childhood desire to learn Spanish and her disappointment when she could not teach me), I have figured that it was a combination of a few things:

First, the matriarchal idea of raising children is usually not only a responsible of the mother, but also older sisters.  My mother has two older sisters, and each one had a hand in raising her.  Knowing that she would need to learn English for school and other social events, they perhaps saw it more beneficial to use their efforts to only teach her English.  This would also explain why my mother has the best English grammar of all of her siblings (I notice these things, and I often get awful stares when I try to correct my family's grammar).

Second, my mother is the youngest of the children.  Being the youngest myself, I am aware that we are often (for lack of a better word) spoiled and things are generally made easier for us.  Rather than putting the "baby" through the hassle of learning two languages, my grandparents perhaps decided only to use their efforts to teach her the language that she would most need.

In both points, I realize the notion of English being the language "needed" in this society.  I now realize that our generation and many more to come are going to be just like my mother: only learning and using the language that we "need," thus tearing ourselves farther and farther from our roots.

Latino Sexuality Reflection Post

After reading the articles and listening to Professor La Fountain Stokes, I gained an understanding of social norms in Latino society and how they compared to American society. It shocked me how Latinos viewed homosexuals in two categories, which determined if they were stigmatized by society or not. This is so different from the ideals of people in the States. Here, people either discriminate against all homosexuals or support all homosexuals. There is no differentiation based on what role they play in the relationship.
Therefore, in Mexico and Central America there is no clear-cut support or criticism of homosexuals in general because some are accepted in society and some are not. It leads me to question then what are their views on gay marriage and gay rights? If the dominant male is not stigmatized while the passive one is, it confuses me how the public can support or go against their rights as a couple. The varying views on homosexuality in the Latino society contrast with American ideals, which open up a wider range of social political differences.

Reflection Post 2

I want to do a reflection post on our Detroit Field Trip to Mexican Town last weekend.  When I first learned that we were going there at the beginning of the semester my initial thoughts were something along the line of "been there done that"; however, I was somewhat excited for the field trip.  I have been going to Mexican Town for over 10 years now with my family whenever we need certain specialty foods that American markets just don't have.  I love driving through the area looking at the murals and the little shops and restaurants because it reminded me of being in California. 

However, I really appreciated the fact that we were able to walk around the area with a native of the town and also to see his work.  My favorite piece over the past years is the last one we saw where the men were picking the corn during the day and the women making the tortillas early in the morning.  I really like the piece because of the colors and how the story of the workers is not only a Mexican or Latino story, but an American one.  Of how the man would work and bring home food (money) for the family and the woman would prepare it.  Granted some may view it as sexist, but for some odd reason I think thats why it appeals to me.  

Before the field trip, I had no prior knowledge of the birth of this little town within Detroit. The roles the Mexican/Latinos played in the early history of the Big Three and other jobs in Michigan such as agricultural were new to me too. I always find it interesting how one can live close a place for so long and know so little. 

Discussion Questions for Friday

How does the structured meaning of homosexuality in the European-American context differ from that of the Mexican/Latin American sexual system?

 

Who receives the stigma for being a homosexual in Mexican/Latin American culture? And how is this different from what you know about the stigma homosexuals face in the European-American culture?

 

What is the meaning of the cochon? And what significance does this term imply in the Latin culture? Conversely, what is the meaning of machista? And what significance does this term imply in the Latin culture?

 

How is dominance and passivity entwined into determining masculine and feminine roles in Latin Culture?

 

What are some derogatory words used in Latin culture to describe homosexuals? For example, Americans commonly use “fairy”, “sissy”, etc.  Also, what do these terms imply about homosexuals in Latin culture?

What can be said about the typical male homosexual transactions in Mexican culture? How is this different from the permissive family life of white middle-class gay men and lesbians in the US?

 

Explain Carrier’s research on mestizo homosexual men in Guadalajara.

 

Explain the meaning of “bisexual escape hatch”.

 

Define: Internacionales

How are White Americans experiences in establishing an openly-gay-identity different from those of Mexican/Latin Americans?

 

According to Hector Carrillo and Horacio Maiorana, what are the 2 categories of individuals used to describe homosexual men in Mexican/Latin culture? Also, what are the other 3 categories used to describe homosexual men in Mexican/Latin culture who DO NOT participate in this gay Latino subculture, but rather assimilate into the dominant European-American culture of the US? Compare and contrast the different categories (specifically the first two in relation to the latter 3).

 

Why is lesbianism less appropriate in Mexican/Latin culture, despite the tolerance of homosexuality?

 

How did the power struggle that Moraga illustrates affect her balance between commitment to the family as well as her religion? Furthermore, how did it shape her future lesbian experiences?

 

How do the words “playing” and “fire” represent metaphors for Chicana and Mexicana lesbians?

How do Mirella’s experiences as an adolescent reflect the dominance men held in society in contrast to the subordination women experience?

 

How do Mirella’s grave concerns about being pure and keeping her virginity reflect how women were viewed in Mexican/Latin culture?

 

How is Maria’s desire to playfully act as a male representative of the superiority of males in Latin culture and the inferiority of females?

 

How does Maria and Josefina’s lesbian relationship differ from the homosexual transactions we previously saw?

 

Do you think virginity was a topic more sought by lesbians than homosexual males? Explain.

 

 

What is the LGMNY?

 

What does Sylvia Rivera suggest is the reason for the intolerance/mistreatment of transgender communities?

 

Who participated in the Stonewell riots? Why did radical straight men and women living in the Village at that time aid the street queens?

 

Why did they keep going back for more?

 

What was it that Rivera worked so desperately to achieve, even landing her in prison?

 

Who is Randy Wicker?

 

What does Rivera explain is the reason for transgender peoples to work on street corners?

 

Who is Jean O’Leary?

Discussion Questions for Friday

Hey these are just a few questions I came up with, I just got out of class and now I have to go to work?  I will post some more in a few hours! 

What is recognized as the 'real' Spanish?

What is bilingualism?  Also why have some authors like John Lipski claim bilingualism is dead?

What usually happens in the US to the third generations of an 'immigrant' family?

Why is it easier for second generations within an 'immigrant' family to be bilingual?

Despite the limited information regarding the linguistic origin of 'Spanlish,' should Spanlish be recognized as a third language?

Why is the bilingual practice of switching from one language to another despised, and users viewed as nonlingual?

Why has sexual orientation differently stigmatized in Latin America and the US?

Why were there prevalently more lesbian academic literature than male homosexuals during the 80s and 90s?

Reflection Post 3

Now that we have finished Unit 2, I want to reflect back on it.

Learning about the Cuban Exodus was really interesting to me. I remember hearing about Cubans crossing through the waters to try and get to the U.S. but I never understood why. The four waves as a summary seemed a little simple at first because we had only covered the main points of it. After the lecture through the readings and researching online out of curiosity, I thought about it more in depth and how overwhelming it must have been for both the Cubans and people in the U.S. at the time...

Also last week on Thursday I went to a play in East Hall about a Cuban who wanted to come up to the U.S. and become famous as a rapper in New York. He told his story with a Cuban-American from California he met along the way in a bilingual-rap-comedy show. I know it seems like a contrast to the Cuban Exodus, but I found it very interesting that this man, Julio, was really struggling in Cuba like many other Cubans during the exodus - and that Cubans are doing everything they can to make a better life for themselves in the U.S. I think the relation between the two is very similar, and I found it extremely interesting especially since we had just finished Unit 2.

Latinos and The Election

Hi everyone.
I'm doing my final project on this, but I also thought it would make a great discussion question to blog about.

What is the role of the 'Latino vote' in the upcoming election?

Since I'm researching this topic I'll provide you with some major point that the experts discuss which might stimulate your response to this post.
They are:
1. Latinos are an important 'swing vote'
2. Latinos are not a homogenous group in terms of political ideology
3. Mexican American presidential voting patterns (who they vote for) is close to or the same as the general American public.
4. Other social identities may play a larger role than the Latino identity. For example age and socio economic status.

Is any of this data surprising?
Why do you think a Latino might vote for Obama?
Why do you think a Latino might vote for McCain?
Do you think there are any other important questions or phenomenon to observe?

Also, if you respond to the post after the election, share your opinion about how the 'Latino vote' influenced the election results.