Miss America: More Then Just A Beauty Queen

In the article Kate Shindle talks about the image of Miss. America and what it stands for had changed. She said from the beginning, “If often seems that they can’t even agree on what she stands for” (613). The image that the Miss. America used to project was good leadership roles in their community and doing things to help soceity. She said they used to go out and help people with different issues like health issues like AIDS and HIV. She got this leadership standing from Miss. America because it gave her standing to be able to talk to many people about these issues. This is the image that those girls want to have but I think that is not what society views as the big picture behind Miss. America. All we see are these skinny, tall beautiful girls in nice clothes walking around on stage talking about the idea of world peace. Shindle points this out too, “I thought my work on the front lines of a life-and-death issue made it clear that there is more to the Miss America program then swimsuits and evening gowns. I quickly realized that wasn’t the case” (615). All we think about these girls having is a pretty face with lots of make up on it. We don’t view them as being really all that smart or really caring about other people then themselves and others like them. She says that she now recognizes this and wishes it would change, “Granted, the belief that beauty and brains are incompatible is an old one but oranizers should do more throughout the year to counter the public’s perception of Mss America as someone who does little more than turn up at boat shows” (615). That is a good idea to try and do things to try and change this materialistic stereotype that we have against these girls but I think that the image that they have now going to be really hard to change. Society had had this idea about those girls for so long that I think that it would be almost pointless to try and change. She thinks it would help if, “Organizers just out the minefields-the trivia contests, the backstage dish sessions that threaten to make the contestants look bad- they’d have more time to say it. That would mean including more footage from the ‘personal interview’ portion of the show, when contestants talk about their political views and platform issues” (616). This would be a really good idea once again but I think that our society has this idea of these girls that don’t really care about what going on in the world and to try and change this idea that everyone had would be really hard because it would seem fake. Even though the girls are viewed as fake people, we would think that the girls were just faking the fact that they care about things such as political issues.

The Way We Wish We Were

In this article Stephanie Coontz talks about types of families and the way our society views the family roles and structure. Our society has a picture in our minds of what a traditional family should look like. This image comes from many different things like older TV shows such as The Andy Griffith Show, Father Knows Best and Wally and Beaver. She points this out when she says, “The problem is not only that these visions bear a suspicious resemblance to reruns of old television series, but also that the scripts of different show have been mixed up” (677). These shows set an image in our minds. They are like role models to us. Coontz points out that we have an image of the “traditional family” and this is an image that society projects. Coontz says this image is, “The notion that traditional families fostered intense intimacy between husbands and wives while creating mothers who were totally available to their children, for example, is an idea that combines some characteristics of the white, middle-class family in the mid-nineteenth century and some of a rival family ideal first articulated in the 1920’s” (677). This is an older style of thinking that our generation is starting to break away from. Coorntz relates back to “The way it’s always been”. We were raised with this idea about what families are supposed to look like in society but in reality this picture that we have isn’t always true. She points out that society can pick a model for themselves, “Pick a ballpark date for the family they have in mind. Once pinned down, they are invariably unwilling to accept the package deal that comes with their chosen model” (678). She says we have different model and some of the examples that she uses are looking at the colonial families and looking at the Victorian style families.
One of the reasons why the family is changing so much in society is because the roles of family members are changing. The mom was the one that always stayed home with the kids and did all of the household work but now the women are also working and having to do the household work. Coontz points this out when she says, “Within the home, prior to the diffusion of household technology at the end of the century, house cleaning and food preparation remained mammoth tasks. It has always been viewes that the women is supposed to stay home and raise the kids and the husband is the one that goes out and provides for the family. This image is changing and other images of family structure ate now arising. She points this out to when she says, “The late nineteenth century saw a modest but significant growth of extended families and a substantial increase in the number of families who were ‘harnessed’ together in household production. Extended families have never been the norm in America” (680). Families are changing in America and the image that was the mom, dad, one boy, one girl, is not a reality anymore.

One Nation, Slightly Divisible

In this article David Brooks talks about their being a difference in voting depending on where you live in America. He says that we are divided and he refers to it as red and blue America. He says, “People in Blue America, which is my part of America, tend to live around big cities on the coasts. People in Red America tend to live on farms or in small towns or small cities far away from the coasts. Things are different there” (582). This shows how Brooks thinks that the American people are different even though we are all Americans. He says this difference comes from the place or environment that we live. He gives some example like, “In Red America the Wal-Marts are massive, with parking lots the size of state parks. In Blue America the stores are small but the mark ups are big” (582). He points out differences in the places that were live in because they influence our political views. Our surroundings play a part in shaping and forming our morals, opinions and standpoints. I think this is very true because people who were brought up in the big cities have a different life style then people who grow up in small towns. Small town people have to drive a while to get to big shopping malls and city people can basically walk to any store they want to. Small town people know most the other people in the community here, as city people don’t because there are so many people. Brooks points out some other differences too such as, “Red America makes social distinctions that Blue America doesn’t” (584). He also points out something that I agree with and that is, “There also seems to be am important distinction between men who work outdoors and men who work indoor” (584). I think this is true because these men have different work ethics. It is these differences that change the way big and small town people think. These differences also set apart their political ideas and this is where the division comes from in political parties and voting. Since these people grow up in different environments they identify with others that grew up with the same background. This means that they can also identify with the political candidates as well. This is something that Brooks also points out, “Gore dressed down throughout his campaign in the hope that these middle-class workers would identify with him” (589). Since they have the same background experiences the voters will want to vote for the candidate that identifies with them most. This is because they feel like they have the same views on issues and some morals. Since they feel a connection the voter will tend to put their vote in for the candidate that they most identify with.