Young children mimic what adults do to learn what is right and wrong. As we get older, our mimicking becomes conformity. However, can't we think of it as we do with children? Is our conformity just based on us trying to figure out what is right and wrong? This says that it increases our connection between people. Is that because we are doing what the other person thinks is right?

So they manipulate our sense of silence for their personal gain????

I 100% agree with this! Growing up, I was taught that 'early is on time and on time is late.' If we were not early, we should apologize for time wasted. I've met plenty of other people though that, if they are on time, they are early, or time is not a sensitive thing. All of these ideas about time were generated from what our parents taught us.

WOW! This is very interesting to know! I'm curious as to what the other cultures said each facial expression was associated with what emotion. Could this be why there are some offensive gestures or emotions between different cultures? For example, Russians are not necessarily offended by smiling but they have a different thought process when they see someone smile in public. They think things like "What is this person up to?" or "They must be doing something illegal." or "This person is weird." To them, they are acting different than their normal. This is absolutely intriguing to me.

Shouldn't this be how we think about everything? We should all have the ability to understand others and what they do, say, or feel and why they do it the way they do. I don't think this should be limited to culture but should be used in all kinds of different way. Maybe if we tried to understand others, there wouldn't be so much hate, bias, prejudice, etc. in the world.

I find this difficult to understand. Are they saying that you can be part of more than one culture? If that is the case, how is culture an identity? You only have one identity, so how can you have multiple cultures?

People higher on the SDO see society almost in a pyramid; they put people into position in the pyramid based on whether they are good or bad. As psychology majors I believe that we see people as equal because we are a helping profession. We help those who need it, not based on who they are or where they're from. However, police officers are technically a helping profession as well, so why do they think differently than those in psychology? Why are police officers high on SDO and psychologists are not, given that they are both helping professions?

Wow. I am floored by this whole paragraph but I chose to only talk about this part. I never realized how much kids are actually taught about gender. I feel as though parenting styles may have something to do with this though. I have worked with a lot of children growing up, as I am a nanny. I've had 3 different boy/girl sibling pairings and, thinking back, I see different patterns of gender recognition. The first 2 were 5 and 6 when i started babysitting them and they were taught that she's a girl and he's a boy but they didn't know what that meant. When they were 7 and 8, they started telling me that they could no longer take a bath together because he's a boy and she's a girl and they couldn't look at each other's parts. My point with this is that they knew what gender was but didn't know the true differences until later. Another pairing was 4 and 5 when i started babysitting them. These two knew immediately that boys and girls are different because of their parts and that they couldn't look at each other naked because that's wrong. They each had their toys to play with and the boy wouldn't play with girl toys and the girl wouldn't play with boy toys. The two I babysit now are a little different in age as they are 4 and 1. The 4 year old is a very smart boy but he does not see gender. He went into the bathroom and left the door open and told me to come in there. He didn't understand that it's 'wrong' for me to do that. He just wanted to talk. He changes his younger sister and he plays just like he would with any other person with anything he wants to play with, boy toys or girl toys. What I mean to say with all of this is that i think that how children are parented or taught plays a huge role in when they identify gender and understand gender differences. I don't believe that we can just look at their age to know how much they understand about gender.

Has there been a study on what it does to females???? Another example of males being put in a bad light. (refer to my previous annotation)

I think this statement right here needs to be publicized immediately!!!! People nowadays believe that men are the ones who physically provoke others more than women. This statement is proof that that is not true! Nowadays we see headlines in the newspaper like "male sexually assaults 10 college females" or "man arrested for beating his girlfriend." While these are real issues that happen, what we don't see nearly as much are when women do the same thing to men (or even other women). Is this because men tend to do more harm so it gets bigger publicity? I don't know, but if that is the reason then society might want to start opening their eyes a little bit more. It angers me when men are the first suspect in assault cases (especially ones against women). I have seen one of my best friends beaten to a bloody pulp by a woman that he was 'dating'. Why hasn't anyone heard about that? Because the news didn't come out to film him being checked out by the paramedics; because the paramedics that checked him out didn't believe that a woman could have done the harm he has sustained; because the judge found the girl not guilty of the assault after she was able to lie her way out of it, saying she didn't have the power enough to hurt him like that. We teach girls today to be aware of our surroundings and watch out for creepy men, but why aren't we teaching our boys that same thing? Because no one believes it could happen. Here's the proof.

I talked about this the other day in class. The bystander effect is a very strange phenomena that occurs within the mind. Everyone has these thoughts whether you realize it or not but only some act upon them. The bystander effect can be the difference between life and death for someone but it will always occur. If there is a group of people around, there is always the question of 'should i help this person' and the statement of 'someone else will help them.' I've seen the bystander effect in action when i worked at a summer camp. All of the people working with the children had to be lifeguard certified to be around the pool at any time. One day, this little boy fell into the deep end of the pool and started to drown. All of the adults saw it but we all paused for a moment before anyone did or said anything. That's when one of our lifeguards jumped in and saved him and the rest of us got the other kids out of the pool. It was almost like time froze for a second before anyone did anything. We all knew how to save him, and we all wanted to save him, but because we all knew how, we all had the thought that someone else would act first. The little boy ended up being fine because someone did jump in and get him, but what if we had waited a few more seconds? What if we had let the bystander effect get in the way and we all assumed the other person would take responsibility?

Reading this makes everything I know about ASD make sense! Those with ASD have different levels at which they may or may not interact with others. It's very interesting to know that more than one part of the brain works with emotions, face recognition, and so much more. It is very hard for someone with ASD to connect with others on an emotional level because parts of their brain are not connecting with each other. Knowing now that these parts of the brain cause these delays, is there a way that we can help the brain to connect and figure all of this out?

While I agree with this statement, I also feel like as though "regularly" can be taken two ways based on the individual. What does one consider "regularly"? If you asked me, I'd say I go out with my friends or have get-togethers regularly, meaning two or three times a month. If you asked another person, "regularly" might mean once or twice a week. I believe it depends on the person's definition of "regularly" and that if the statement were based between a set amount of time spent with friends, the statistics would be lower. I do not believe that "regularly" is clearly stated within these statistics.

I have seen firsthand how each of the parenting styles helps or hinders a child's relationship with their parents. A parent who is always on top of their child, making sure that no mistakes are made, and never giving a warm embrace when they fall, will not have a strong relationship with their child. A parent who lets their child make as many mistakes as they want and never corrects them on anything might have a good relationship with their child but it will be on a friend level and not a parent/child level. The best kind of parent is the one who lets a child learn from their mistakes but also embraces them when they are hurt or sad. This parent will let their child grow into an adult but always be there for them when they need it. This relationship will be great from both sides because the child will not feel like they are being suffocated but they know that they will always have their parent.