RR #2 "Two Ways a Woman Can Get Hurt"

In Jean Kilbourne’s “Two ways a Woman Can Get Hurt”, she discusses the trend of violence against women depicted in modern advertising. Kilbourne uses many concrete examples of violent and demining advertisements, and she uses the actual advertisements so we the reader know exactly what she is referencing throughout her piece. She explains in great detail the underlying expectations and intentions the advertisements are supposed to portray. The explanations include the thought of women being victimized and men being dominate, and these are the main factors in selling these products. The product advertisements range from cologne, to jeans, to watches, and many other products, and all the products use the same general ideals of male dominance.

Kilbourne is reflecting on the constant unbalanced system that reigns over American, and the worlds, general population in popular culture. Her main argument is that men should not be shown as dominate and forceful, but rather the men that are depicted as jerks, (married men or those in monogamous relationships and those that are respectful) should be the ones adorned with female affection. However, the men with forceful attitudes and those that show affection by ignoring women are part of the problem with the female population feeling inadequate constantly searching for an apathetic man’s approval. She also believes that we should introduce more powerful less docile women in advertisements versus those submissive punching bags depicted in the advertisements of the 1990’s and before.

Although Kilbourne makes a powerful argument she also is adding to the problem by widening the gender gap. As a reader I was slightly put off by her constant badgering of the members of the male community, and her intention to belittle the strength of women. By saying that men will always resort to a violent reaction when trying to obtain something they want is extremely limiting to men. Men have the cognitive ability to see the difference between right and wrong, and just because they see that a man in an advertisement takes what he wants to gain the favor of the local “hottie” doesn’t mean he automatically thinks that rape is the answer. In turn, women do not have the constant need to play the victim, and by telling women they are the victims you take away their power same as the advertisements do. Although many of her thoughts and examples are relevant to the times, and to certain demographics because pop culture moves so quickly something that is relevant in the 1990’s in current times they make far less sense. 

Final Polish: Prop 30 Op-Ed Paper

Proposition 30: Taxing Our Way to a Better School System

On November 6^th, 2012 California residents will be deciding the fate of their public education system. California’s populous will be determining whether or not to pass Proposition 30, which is a tax measure that will use the accrued tax revenue to support K through 12 public schools and community colleges.  The lack of funding to these educational institutions since the recession began in 2008 has already been detrimental, but the amount of funding that would have to be cut if Proposition 30 doesn’t pass would be devastating. California’s education system has suffered immensely from the economic down turn, and Prop 30 is the first step in restoring the system to its former glory.

Proposition 30 would establish a four year raise in California’s sales tax a quarter of one cent, a seven year raise of 1 to 3 percent in personal income tax for individuals earning over $250,000 or more and for joint filers earning $500,000 or more. The tax measure is also retroactive pulling from the fiscal year of 2012. Although this tax does not include capital gains taxes, which are stocks, bonds, real estate, or any asset used to make money, it is still quite a lot to ask of California’s 1%.  Some citizens of California are afraid that we will drive our higher earning businesses to more tax friendly states because California has one of the highest sales tax rates of any state already.

While this tax measure is projected to accrue approximately six billion dollars annually and over fifty billion dollars in tax revenues over the next seven years, many worry about the accountability of those in charge of this money. According to the text of the proposition, the money is placed into a special bank account, called the “Education Protection Account”, which the legislature cannot touch. In addition to the use of this special account, the proposition proposes further legal protection of this money. Specifically, it states in the finding section that the funds “will be subject to an independent audit every year to ensure they are spent only for schools and public safety.” Furthermore, the text explains that those who misuse these funds “will be subject to prosecution and criminal penalties.” These rules were set in place to assure the money is used for what it is intended for, and thus protects the integrity of the proposition and the decision of California voters.  This section of the proposition also addresses the arguments of those who oppose the proposition because of its potential to fund a “Shell Game”, or a redistribution of funds to fill previously drained pensions. The strict and specific oversight of the funds resulting from the execution of this proposition ensure that all entities involved in its use are legally accountable by penalty of law, so potential misuse can and will be documented.

According to the information provided on the California Board of Education website, there are 6,263,438 students in our K-12 public education system, and over 2,400,000 students in our community college system. Educational budget cuts will affect not only these students, but also the jobs of around 57,711 academic staff members. Furthermore, these statistics also don’t take into account the families of these faculty, staff, and students who rely on the educational system. On the other hand, the number of those who would be affected by the rise in personal income taxes described in Prop 30 is 400,000, according to the graph provided on California’s Community Educational Television’s (KCET) website.  Some might think it is unfair for those who earn the most to be “punished” for it by having to pay higher taxes on their hard earned money, but a deeper look at the numbers involved on either side of this proposition shows clearly that we, as a populous, would be hurting far more people by not passing Prop 30.

Currently I’m a member of 2,400,000 people attending California’s Community College system, and without it higher education would not be an option for myself. I come from a family where college is a distant dream, and how you realize that dream is entirely up to you. My family is part of a low-income socio-economic bracket, which most people refer to as lower class.  All four of my sisters and I have used the California Community College system as a means to achieve a higher education. In high school, each of us needed to work around 24-30 hours a week to help support ourselves and our family, so perfect grades were nearly impossible. The community college and other public education systems are sometimes a person’s only means to be able to achieve a college degree.

In addition to affecting my present student status, this proposition will affect my future career aspirations. I’m currently attending college in order to eventually become a community college teacher, and the thought of finishing my degree with nowhere to teach is a disheartening thought. The more and more cuts we make to the system the less opportunities there are for those of us wanting to teach future generations.

If this measure does not pass at the polls in November, the state will have to cut 5.4 billion dollars from the budget this year, which would be catastrophic for the school systems that receive funding from the state budget. One third of California’s budget is currently allocated for public schools, but this 35.7% isn’t substantial when the state carries a massive 16 billion dollars in debt. Without the collective help from the people of California, our school systems will face expansive and crippling cuts, and possible closures.  According to the California Constitution, under the laws set into place after the passing of Proposition 13, to create new tax revenue in California requires two-thirds approval by California residents. This was set in place to protect residents from frivolous tax initiatives, but it makes it even harder to get those required votes because the majority is not based upon fifty percent plus one it’s based upon two-thirds, which if you are looking at the population is a lot of people. This is why California schools need everyone to vote November 6^th because every vote matters.

California’s public schools are facing the biggest challenges they have ever faced, and without this tax measure the outcome is bleak. However, if we band together and support the right kind of legislation, we can create a far more viable educated community than we have ever had. Proposition 30 is a step forward and a critical part of the solution to save California’s school system.  It is a necessary investment for our collective future, because right now we have to pay a little to save a lot. 

Final Draft

Proposition 30: Taxing Our Way to a Better School System

On November 6^th, 2012 California residents will be deciding the fate of their public education system. California’s populous will be deciding whether or not to pass Proposition 30, which is a tax measure that will use the accrued tax revenue to support K through 12 public schools and community colleges.  The lack of funding to these educational institutions since the recession began in 2008 has already been detrimental, but the amount of funding that would have to be cut if Proposition 30 doesn’t pass would be devastating. California’s education system has suffered immensely from the economic down turn, and Prop 30 is the first step in restoring the system to its former glory.

Proposition 30 would establish a four year raise in California’s sales tax a quarter of one cent, a seven year raise of 1 to 3 percent in personal income tax for individuals earning over $250,000 or more. The tax measure is also retroactive pulling from the fiscal year of 2012. Although this tax does not include capital gains taxes, which are stocks, bonds, real estate, or any asset used to make money, it is still quite a lot to ask of California’s 1%.  Some citizens of California are afraid that we will drive our higher earning businesses to more tax friendly states, because California has one of the highest sales tax rates of any state.

While this tax measure is projected to accrue six billion dollars annually and another fifty billion dollars in tax revenues over the next seven years, many worry about the accountability of those in charge of this money. According to the text of the proposition, the money is placed into a special bank account, called the “Education Protection Account”, which the legislature cannot touch. In addition to the use of this special account, the proposition proposes further legal protection of this money. Specifically, it states in the finding section that the funds “will be subject to an independent audit every year to ensure they are spent only for schools and public safety.” Furthermore, the text explains that those who misuse these funds “will be subject to prosecution and criminal penalties.” These rules were set in place to assure the money is used for what it is intended for, and thus protects the integrity of the proposition and the decision of California voters.  This section of the proposition also addresses the arguments of those who oppose the proposition because of its potential to fund a “Shell Game”, or a redistribution of funds to fill previously drained pensions. The strict and specific oversight of the funds resulting from the execution of this proposition ensure that all entities involved in its use are legally accountable by penalty of law, so potential misuse can and will be documented.

 If this measure does not pass at the polls in November, the state will have to cut 5.4 billion dollars from the budget this year, which would be catastrophic for the school systems that receive funding from the state budget. One third of California’s budget is currently allocated for public schools, but this 35.7% isn’t substantial when the state carries a massive 16 billion dollars in debt. Without the collective help from the people of California, our school systems will face expansive and crippling cuts, and possible closures.

According to the information provided on the California Board of Education website, there are 6,263,438 students in our K-12 public education system, and over 2,400,000 students in our community college system. Educational budget cuts will affect not only these students, but also the jobs of around 57,711 academic staff members. Furthermore, these statistics also don’t take into account the families of these faculty, staff, and students who rely on the educational system. On the other hand, the number of those who would be affected by the rise in personal income taxes described in Prop 30 is 400,000, according to the graph provided on KCET’s website.  Some might think it is unfair for those who earn the most to be “punished” for it by having to pay higher taxes on their hard earned money, but a deeper look at the numbers involved on either side of this proposition shows clearly that we, as a populous, would be hurting far more people by not passing Prop 30.

Currently I’m a member of 2,400,000 people attending California’s Community College system, and without it higher education would not be an option for myself. I come from a family where college is a distant dream, and how you realize that dream is entirely up to you. My family is part of a low-income socio-economic bracket, which most people refer to as lower class.  All four of my sisters and I have used the California Community College system as a means to achieve a higher education. In high school, each of us needed to work around 24-30 hours a week to help support ourselves and our family, so perfect grades were nearly impossible. The community college and other public education systems are sometimes a person’s only means to be able to achieve a college degree.

In addition to affecting my present student status, this proposition will affect my future career aspirations. I’m currently attending college in order to eventually become a community college teacher, and the thought of finishing my degree with nowhere to teach is a disheartening thought. The more and more cuts we make to the system the less opportunities there are for those of us wanting to teach future generations.

California’s public schools are facing the biggest challenges they have ever faced, and without this tax measure the outcome is bleak. However, if we band together and support the right kind of legislation, we can create a far more viable educated community than we have ever had. Proposition 30 is a step forward and a critical part of the solution to save California’s school system.  It is a necessary investment for our collective future, because right now we have to pay a little to save a lot. 

Rough Draft

Proposition 30: Taxing our way to better school system

On November 6^th, 2012 California residents will be deciding the fate of their public education system. California’s will be voting yes or no on whether or not to pass Proposition 30, which is a tax measure that will use the accrued tax revenue for public schools k-12 plus community colleges.  The lack of funding to the schools since the recession began in 2008 has been detrimental, but the amount of funding that would have to be cut if prop 30 doesn’t pass would be devastating. California’s education system has suffered immensely from the economic down turn, and prop 30 is the first step in restoring the system to its former glory.

Proposition 30 is raise in California’s sales tax a quarter of a cent for the next four years, and also includes a raise from 1-3% in personal income tax for individuals making over $250,000 or more a year in personal income for seven years. The tax measure is also retroactive pulling from the fiscal year of 2012. Although this tax does not include capital gains taxes, which are stocks, bonds, real estate, or any asset used to make money, it is still quite a lot to ask of California’s 1%.  Some citizens of California are afraid that we will drive our higher earning businesses to more tax friendly states, because California has one of the highest sales tax rates of any state.

This tax measure is projected to accrue six billion dollars annually, and fifty billion dollars in tax revenues over the next seven years. According to the proposition the money is placed into a special bank account called, “Education Protection Account”, that the legislature cannot touch. As well as special accounts the prop states, “These funds will be subject to an independent audit every year to ensure they are spent only for schools and public safety. Elected officials will be subject to prosecution and criminal penalties if they misuse the funds”(Section II (i)). These rules were set in place to assure the money is used by and whom it is intended for, and it also protects the integrity of the California voters.  This section of the proposition also denies those who are against the propositions “Shell Game”, their belief that the money will be pushed around to fill previously drained pensions. All those who use this money are legally accountable for it by penalty of law, so the misuse can and will be documented.

 If this measure does not pass at the polls in November, the state will have to cut 5.4 billion dollars this year from the budget, which would be catastrophic for the school system that receives it’s funding from the state budget. There is 51.9% allocation for the schools in the state budget, but even 51.9% isn’t a lot when a state, much like California, is 16 billion dollars in debt. Without the collective help from the people of California our school systems will face expansive cuts, and possible closures.

According to the information provided on the California Board of Education website, there are 6,263,438 students in our k-12 public education system, and over 2,400,000 students in our community college system. As well as students being affected you’d also see around 57,711 academic staff members whose jobs may be at stake. Not to mention the family members who support these students, and those whose families are supported by the education system. Those who would be affected rise in personal income taxes if prop 30 passes would be approximately 400,000 people according to the graph provided on KCET’s website.  Some might think it is unfair for those who earn the most to be “punished” for it by having to pay higher taxes on their hard earned money, but if you just look at the numbers it becomes very clear that we as a populous would be hurting far many more people by not passing prop 30 than if we didn’t.

Currently I’m a member of 2,400,000 people attending California’s Community College system, and without it I couldn’t dream of a higher education. I come from a family where college is a dream, and how you realize that dream is entirely up to you. My family would be put into a lower socio-economic bracket, which most people refer to as lower class.  All four of my sisters and I have used the California Community College system as a means to achieve a higher education. When we were in high school we all had to work around 24-30 hours a week to help support ourselves and our family, so perfect grades were nearly impossible. The community college and other public education systems are sometimes a person’s only means to be able to achieve a college degree.

As well as affecting my present this proposition also affects my future. I’m currently attending college to be a community college teacher, and the thought of finishing my degree with nowhere to teach is a disheartening thought. The more and more cuts we make to the system the less opportunities there are for those of us wanting to teach future generations.

California’s schools are facing the biggest challenges they have ever faced, and without this tax measure the outcome is bleak, but if we band together we can create a far more viable educated community than we’ve ever had. Prop 30 is for California, for our collective future, and now we have to pay a little to save a lot.