Recently in Extra Credit Category

Extra Credit week 14

Reading more through the entries in this blog I had a memory of my first job when I was 16 years old. It was in my neighborhood, in a small local grocery store that has long since been replaced due to the overtaking of the larger grocery stores such as Cub & Rainbow. Most cashiers were female and the grocery baggers were male. The lead manager was male and there was one female manager along with another male manager under the lead. This job came to mind mostly because it was the first time I had worked a job where my earned income had taxes taken out and also because I was made horribly aware of the assumptions people can make of others in society.
I had been there roughly a couple of months and I worked a evening & weekend cashier position. At the end of my shift, which was 10pm as this was before the laws were put into place as to how late a high school student could work on school nights, I was called into the managers office by a male supervisor I had never seen before in the store. It turned out that he was from the district office and wanted to ask me about the way the store handled the closing out of the registers at the end of the night.
Procedure was that the managers got the drawers ready and set them up. These were registers that were not secured or locked by a employee's code as they are today. Anyone who worked in this store knew how to open the registers. I was still "in training" and he wanted to figure out why my drawer had been coming up short on a few occasions. I let him know that I was never made aware that my register was coming up short and that I was not there to count the money before or at the end of the shifts. He continued to probe into any possibility of me being responsible for the unbalanced drawer and accused me of stealing money from the store. He made statements regarding "understanding the pressure of being a young single mom who came from a home with only one parent who is also struggling financially to pay the bills." I remember feeling like I could not believe this was happening to me. He asked if I took any money that evening and I again said I had not that evening or at any other time. I actually offered to remove my socks shoes and keep going if he needed any more proof that I had no money on me. Keeping in mind that it was only him and I in this office, but I was innocent and could not believe I was being looked at in that way. I was a high school student and a single mom. I did come from a one parent home as my father had raised me and while he did struggle on an accountants low wages to support his 2 daughters and granddaughter, we were honest people.
At this point, he must have realized that i had nothing for him to prove and I left the store. I informed my older sister, who had been waiting for me outside of this and she parked the car and went in the store and really laid into both of the managers and the guy from the district office. Needless to say, I did not return there to work. Had my family known more about discrimination laws in employment we may have taken this to a higher level as this was truly a horrible experience then for me and would be for anyone to have to endure. It truly spoke volumes to me that people saw me very differently because I was a teen mother. I was not seen in a positive way to many people. I was judged pretty harshly by those who knew only one thing about me, that I was a teen mom.

Response to hahnx136 comment in blog 15

I am not sure if you are aware of the GLBT Studies Program that is available here at the U. Here is the link

There will most likely be a class that covers the topics you are interested in. You could complete a minor or just take some classes too.

I too have an interest in GLBT issues and am looking forward to being able to take classes from this program to broaden my GWSS major.

Extra credit from blog 7

I still agree with the comment I made on my blog 7 post because history is something that evolves as the world changes. things go down in history that are relavent to the time period and some of that information may not be true. History has documents of events that are concrete, the truth and will never change based upon the evolution of the world.

For instance history has things documented from the 1930 ( not sure of the correct year) about black people on how one could identify a black person as a criminal by looking at their features, but now today 2010, that is not the case because black people have evolved as well as America's view of black people has evolved

Extra credit

When looking at Ben's blog about marital rape from blog 10 I do not agree fully, with some of the comments that were made. Number one marriage is not seen as a private institution, so it would be easy for courts to get involved because people in marriages want others to know that they are married, every couple, no matter homosexual or heterosexual or any one else, when they get married they want their loved ones and every one else to know it.
As far as sex in the marriage, that is different because that is a private event that couples share within their own home and are not as voiceful about that issue, so the courts would not have a reason to intervene

Law Symposium Extra Credit

I attended the panel entitled Immigration Issues Facing Non-Traditional Families. The panelists spoke of the issues having to do with immigration for non-traditional families. They went over the history of the difficulties of immigration policies. Sexual deviance (namely homosexuality) was enough to disallow people from the US. It was labeled as a psychopathic disorder. Partly because of fear of homosexuality, those that are HIV positive were not allowed in, encouraging people to not get tested and not take HIV medicine. Tourist visas have been and still are difficult to get for partners of citizens.

Then they talked about how even today, there are still difficulties for non-traditional families. For instance, people still have some difficulties getting in because of HIV. There have been strides to get visas for a partner of a citizen, but they are only tourist visas; one still can't work. Transgender persons also have difficulties getting visas, though they might have an easier time if they are recognized as converting to an opposite sex relationship. It was interesting and surprisingly to hear that many of these new regulations that offered more rights to non-traditional families were just recently (less than five years) put into place.

Compelling State Interest

I would be interested in a greater discussion of what the writers of the abortion cases we have studied, particularly Roe v Wade, intended by the term compelling state interest. I have done a search through the text on my computer, and cannot seem to find an outline of what the compelling state interest in proscribing abortion might be or how compelling state interest in abortion regulation is justified.

The phrase seems to keep popping up regarding the compelling state interest in potential life. Combined with the "potential life" bit, I find this phrase rather concerning. Why does the state have a compelling interest in potential life? What, exactly, is defined as potential life? Is it simply early pregnancies? I wonder this because the term potential life can be, and has been, employed in discussions of birth control such as oral contraceptives or the IUD.

What is the basis on which the state can claim an interest on behalf of people who do not exist yet? It seems a strange interest for the state to me, and a potentially dangerous one. The problem with crafting decisions on the basis of pre-people is that those individuals have no ability as constituents to voice an opinion - so it is difficult to find evidence for claims made on their behalf. I suppose children are in a similar situation in that legislation is crafted with their interest in mind, even though they do not have certain civic rights of expression such as voting, however even children are possible to some degree of expressing opinions.

I don't even know if these considerations make sense in light of the way in which "compelling state interest in potential life" is referred to in abortion opinions and law, but it seems curious that a greater explanation is so difficult to find. If it would be possible to explain this further in class I would be greatly appreciative.

Law school symposium on Modern American Family 4/9

Extra Credit opportunity:

The Law School's Journal "Law & Inequality: a Journal of Theory & Practice" is hosting a day-long symposium on the modern American family on Friday, April 9. A detailed description of the topics covered can be found here:

and the schedule is here:

I encourage you all to attend any sessions that seem interesting or may contribute to your paper/presentation research. For extra credit (10 points) post a substantive description of the session that you attend (around 200 words).