Nature vs Nurture

I was born with blue eyes and blonde hair, but where did I get my athleticism, driven personality, and intelligence? Did I inherit these abilities from my parents, or did my environment aid in their development?  Throughout the field of psychology, nature versus nurture has been one of the most controversial debates on the topic of human development.

In the field of psychology, the term nature refers to the genetic material given to us at the time of conception. We all know that we get half of out genetic information from out mother and father. Also, we know that eye and hair color are encoded in our genetic information as well. Psychologists who believe nature is everything conclude that human intelligence level, sexual orientation, and personality are encoded within the genetic information as well. 

According to Socrates, human knowledge is innate. Socrates believed that we are born with all our knowledge. He believed that knowledge is not acquired through experience, but rather knowledge was already within us and the idea of reasoning was all it took to bring that knowledge to the surface.

The term nurture, when it comes to psychology, refers to the social and physical forces that affect our genetic information before we are born and throughout our lifespan. Psychologists that believe in the nurture aspect of development think that intelligence, personality, and sexual orientation are all influenced by the environment you are exposed to. The nurture theorists believe that the people in our lives, and the culture within which we live, have the greatest effect on our development. 

Locke knew that not all ideas were from experience. He wanted to determine how the mind works and how humans developed their knowledge. Locke believed that education is a critical part in development permitting one to understand their experiences. Locke says children acquire their knowledge through curiosity. 

Currently, many scientists believe that nature and nurture work together in the developmental process. The first concept in combining these theories is known as range of reaction, which means each person's unique genetically determined response to the environment.  Range of reaction consists of two main ideas. First, each person's predetermined genetic makeup allows them to perceive the same environment differently. Second, there are differences in the way genetics and environment influences can be combined to make two different people appear the same. 

PTSD In the Journalism Profession

September 11th has decisively transformed the everyday contexts within which journalists routinely operate evidence of this transformation is everywhere, not least with regard to the struggle to negotiate the complexities of the crisis in a suitably fair or balanced manner. 

Trauma cannot be resolved by sticking strictly to the facts and information gathered. For journalists, the need to work through trauma has not only been individual but collective repercussions too. Journalism plays a key role in moving entire populations from trauma to recovery, but journalists themselves need time to come to terms with what they have experienced. Journalists can experience trauma in their everyday jobs, such as reporting on car crashes or a death of someone they may know, not only from reporting from war zones. 

There are 8 safety principles for journalist reporting in war zones. 

1. Commitment: the media, public authorities and journalists themselves shall systematically seek ways to assess and reduce the risks in war zones or dangerous areas by consulting each other and exchanging all useful information.
2. Free Will: covering wars involves an acceptance by media workers of the risks attached and also a personal commitment which means they go on a strictly voluntary basis because of the risks they should have the right to refuse such assignments without explanation and without there being any finding of unprofessional conduct.
3. Experience: war reporting requires special skills and experience so editors should choose staff or free lancers who are mature and use to crisis situations. Team work in the field should be encouraged to ensure the safety of all journalists.
4. Preparation: regular training in how to cope in war zones or dangerous areas will help reduce the risk of journalists.
5. Equipment: editors should provide special correspondent working in dangerous areas with safety equipment.
6. Insurance: media management should take all necessary steps to provide this before sending or employing staff on dangerous assignments.
7. Psychological Counseling: media management should ensure that journalists who desire have access to counseling after returning from dangerous areas.
8. Legal Protection: journalists on dangerous assignments are considered civilians under the Geneva Conventions, provided they do not do anything or behave in any way that might compromise this status.

Journalists need to be aware that Post Traumatic Stress Disorder can affect them, whether they report from war zones to car crashes on a daily basis. Journalists in the profession need to understand there is nothing wrong with receiving help if they feel overwhelmed. It is healthy to talk to someone than to bottle it all up and have it crash down on you later because it can eventually affect your personal life and profession one. 

A Sophisticated Killer

"Murder is not about lust and it's not about violence. It's about possession. When you feel the last breath of life coming out of a woman, you look into her eyes. At that point, it's being God."

Those are the words of Theodore Bundy. In his life, he was considered an attractive, well mannered and educated man. All through his life, he excelled in school and went on to becoming a lawyer. However, Theodore Bundy grew up to become one of America's worst known serial killers.

Bundy was a very sophisticated killer. The women Bundy targeted were all very similar. He targeted women between early teens to mid twenties. They all were caucasian with brown hair that was parted down the middle and all had dark eyes. It's believed that the women Bundy targeted resembled the women who broke his heart in his early adult years. She was a sophisticated, beautiful student with brown hair parted down the middle with brown eyes. She ended their relationship because she thought he was not mature enough for a true commitment. Some believe this was the trigger that started Bundy's killing spree.

He used very cunning ways to lure his victims, which is referred to as a signature. He would pretend to be injured or helpless. For example, he would wear a cast on his arm or use crutches while trying to carry books. He would also ask women if they could help him.

Once they were in his car, he would strike the women over the head with a crowbar until they were knocked out. He then preceded to sexually assault them and strangle them to death. The sexual assault gave Bundy a sense of power over the women which is usually the way a rapist maintain control. Then he would silence them by strangling.

Bundy killed many women across the nation. His first confirmed victim was Lynda Ann Healy. She was twenty-one when taken. He broke into her house, hit her unconscious and dressed her in clothes. Then he wrapped her in a sheet and carried her out of the house. A year later her body was found with her head decapitated.

Other victims were Chi Omega sorority girls, Lisa Levy and Margaret Bowman, in Florida. Levy was twenty and Bowman was twenty-one. Bundy broke into the sorority house and killed them both from striking them over the head, but he sexually assaulted Levy. He was later convicted of this crime because of the bite mark he left on Levy. He beat two other women, but they survived the attack.

His finally victim was Kimberly Leach. She was twenty years old when murdered. He kidnapped, raped, and murdered her. He disposed of her body by throwing it under a shed. He was also convicted of her murder. This case is what gave Bundy the death penalty.

Bundy spent many years in prison before finally being put to death. Since he was a law student, he was able to use the justice system to his advantage by appealing his case for more than ten years. Bundy finally confessed to twenty-eight murders, but many suspect that there were many more. Many of his victims, to this day, have never been found. On January 24, 1989, Bundy was executed in the electric chair. Fireworks were used to celebrate his death.

Local Counselor Motivated to Improve Children's Lives

(AIKEN, SC)- Even though it can be challenging at times hearing the awful experiences, local counselor, Amy Loftus, is still motivated to undo the emotional damage her clients have endured throughout their lives.

“I want to do my part in bringing happiness and a sense of relief to as many lives as possible,” states Loftus. 

Loftus has a private practice in which she counsels young children, adolescents, adults, and families. Some of her cases include children who’s parents are going through a divorce, who are experiencing symptoms of depression, who are experiencing issues with their sexuality, and who may be suffering from the effects of bullying by their peers. She may appear in court as an expert witness for cases dealing with custody battles typically associated with divorce. 

“I am most passionate about children and adolescents who constantly hear that they are worthless, stupid, never will amount to anything, etc. as well as ones who go through life with parents who never give them the attention, love and support that they deserve,” says Loftus with a soft smile across her face. “My passion is for all children and adolescents whom I come in contact with to feel that they are valuable.”

Along with her private practice, she works in the forensic area of counseling. She works with juvenile offenders who have been adjudicated of a crime who have been court-ordered to participate in counseling. She deals with juveniles who have committed a wide variety of offenses but her specialty is working with juvenile sex offenders. 

She is a Clinically Certified Sex Offender Treatment Specialist, for adults and juveniles but only choose to treat juveniles, through the National Association for Forensic Counselors. 

“Hearing the stories that I hear day after day can be very difficult, especially hearing the experiences that my offenders had in various times in their lives that contributed to their criminal actions, particularly my sex offenders,” states Loftus. 

One of the most challenging thing she deals with is working with juveniles who have already adopted the criminal mindset and distorted beliefs about reality. Once those beliefs have been developed and acted on, it is very difficult to transform. 

Another challenging issue is to make significant progress with a child or adolescent when parents refuse to take responsibility for contributing to their child’s mentality. 

“If parents refuse to acknowledge and alter what they are contributing to their child's pathology or criminality, it can be near impossible to assist juveniles in making positive life changes,” states Loftus. 

In order to be mentally and emotionally ready for the day, Loftus focuses on what she has control over and makes peace with what she doesn’t. 

Cyberbullying Among Teens Today

Over the years, school’s have debated whether or not they need to develop policies regarding cyberbullying. The advancement use of technology to bully among young children stops school officials in their tracks. 

According to the National Conference of State Legislature, The Safe School Climate Act states that schools need to include cyberbullying within their existing bullying policy. The act prevents harassment, intimidation, or bullying to ensure a safe learning environment for students to achieve academic success. 

“It is very important that children feel like they can approach an adult, including a school official, about being a victim,” states counselor Amy Loftus. However, many students don’t report anything because their school will not take action over the situation and can sometimes make the issue worse. 

Teenagers not only bully at school but through the use of social media. This is known as cyberbullying which uses an electronic device to send  hurtful or threatening messages. Victims of cyberbullying no longer can feel safe at home because bulling continues where they should feel safe.

School psychologists, or counselors, can provide the school with guidelines in awareness promotion, prevention and policy making to address cyberbullying. It is important for school officials to become aware of the warning signs for victims. 

They may become socially isolated from other children that they would normally socialize with, passive when before they had an outgoing personality and show symptoms of depression. 

School psychologists can use a couple different way to bring awareness to the school’s faculty. They can develop workshops for understanding social networking sites and what specifically cyberbullying means. Also, they can start training programs for knowing how to deal with victims. 

In order to help students feel safe within the walls of their school, officials need to establish a prevention plan that both faculty member and students are aware of. The plan should contain what cyberbullying is and the impact it has on victims, to be respectful of others when online, the responsible use of technology, and the legal ramifications. 

Along with the prevention plan, a mentoring program helps students get involved with the issue. The program involves older students helping the younger with any issues of bullying or any other problems they may have in their lives.

The mentoring program helps students to get involved with the prevention of cyberbullying. With the use of students, victims may feel more inclined to come forward because they can talk to kids their own age or older that may have already dealt with their own issues. 

Schools have legal right to intervene with the issues of cyberbullying. In order for the programs at school to be successful, parental involvement is very critical.  

Privacy in Australia

The 'right to privacy' has evolved over the centuries to protect an individual's space and reputation. A major turning point came in Britain and Europe with the death of Princess Diana in Paris in 1997 after a car chase involving paparazzi. In 1998, the United Kingdom passed its Human Rights Act, which incorporated the European Convention on Human Rights into British Law, including a right to privacy.

There is no common law right to privacy in Australia but there are a number of laws that went part of the way to protecting the privacy of citizens. The Privacy Act 1988 confers a degree of enforcement power upon the Federal Court and Federal Magistrates Court to protect privacy but focuses o private information held by government departments and large corporations.

Australia Law Reform Commission recommends Australia should have a privacy law that identifies several types of invasions: interference with a person's home or family, subjecting someone to unauthorized surveillance, interference with an individual's correspondence private written or oral communication and disclosure of sensitive facts relating to an individual's private life. However, the courts would have to take into account whether the public interest in maintaining the claimant's privacy outweighed the public interest, including the interest of the public being informed about matters of public concern.

There are privacy related law in Australia. Australia's Press Council published 'Privacy Standards' which contain a series of guidelines for media organizations to help ensure that individual's privacy is respected. They cover topics as the collection of personal information, the use and disclosure of the personal information, the quality of information and the anonymity of sources.

There are other laws to protect privacy, such as trespass, nuisance, surveillance/listening devices and obscenity and indecency. With trespass, a journalist has no special rights to entry to someone else's property beyond the ordinary citizen. Every person who is in possession of premises has the right to refuse others entry to those premises. However, a journalist can use material that has resulted from trespassing but not from unlawful surveillance.

The area of nuisance is very limited under the law. It protects an occupiers use or enjoyment of their land form unreasonable interferences. The nuisance has to be persistent and annoying for it to be actionable. Constant systematic surveillance and continuos phone calls persisting despite request they cease could be deemed as a nuisance. However, courts judge the actual definition of what is deemed a nuisance.

The Federal and State Laws affect the use of surveillance and listening devices and place varying restrictions on the publication of report gained through the use of these devices. Under the Commonwealth Law it is an offense to intercept communication passing over a telecommunication system without the knowledge of the person making the communication. Using, publishing or retaining a record of information gained in this way is considered an offense as well. Each state and territories have also legislation prohibiting the recording of a private conversation without the consent of all parties to the conversation by someone who is not a party to the conversation.

Obscenity and indecency is as much an issue of public taste as it is privacy. The public test defines what is considered good or bad and what is right or wrong. The decision rest with the publisher and editor rather than the journalist. A range of provision apply to obscene or indecent material and each state and territory have laws restricting this kind of publication. The public does not always want to know about a celebrities private life.

Intellectual Property

Journalists may come into contact with the laws related to ownership of ideas and their expression in two main ways: when they need to use the ideas or published work of others in their won reporting or publishing and when other media outlets want to reproduce the journalists' work in some new publication or broadcast. But in the field of intellectual property, journalist could well be either the user or the used, the complainant, the plaintiff or the defendant, depending on whether someone else has used their work or they have used the work of another.

Intellectual property law is defined as a group of legislative and common law rights affording protection to creative and intellectual effort and includes laws on copyright, design, patent, circuit layouts, plant varieties, confidential information, trade mark and business reputation. Plagiarism has significant ethical implications but also legal repercussions as well.

But a journalists' main concern is the law of copyright, in the Copyright Act of 1968, for the protection of their own work and the use of the work of others. There are four areas of the Copyright Act that are significant to journalist: Part III which deals with the copyright of original literary, dramatic, musical and artistic work; Part IV which deals with copyright in subject matter other than works, such as broadcast; Part V which outlines the remedies and offenses applying; and Part IX which states the enforceable moral rights of authors.

An important thing to remember is that copyright does not apply to an idea only the material expression of that idea. An idea itself can't be protected by copyright law. There is nothing in copyright law to prevent journalists from gleaning ideas or information from other sources when creating their own work. Copyright operates to protect the work of the creator.

In Australia, there is no need to put the copyright symbol on 'work' because the protection is automatic form the instant a work is created. Under copyright, the 'author' of the work is the person who has created the work, not the person who has thought of the idea. There are situations when the author of the work does not own the copyright. For example, the journalist may not own the copyright but the media outlet they work for does. Copyright is protected for 70 years after the author's death and then it is considered 'public domain' meaning permission is no longer required in order to use the material.

Journalist need to take in considerations when reproducing the work of others, such as has the copyright period expired, has the copyright holder assigned copyright to you and copyright holders can 'license' you to use the material.

Ethics in Journalism

'A set of prescriptive rules, principles, values and virtues of character that inform and guide interpersonal and intrapersonal conduct: that is the conduct of people toward each other and conduct of people toward themselves.'-Edward Spence, 2005

Ethics govern behavior. Ethics can vary depending on the socio-cultural context, historical context, and political context. These all impact on what is considered to be normal and actions that are deemed to be deviant and beyond the bounds of ethical codes. Ethics are difficult to define to one set of beliefs because they are linked to morality and values and people's values are different all around the world.

Ethics should be considered as part of a set of social relations that govern the way news is gathered, written, and published. A reporters' ability to tell the truth, be accurate, fair and act without fear or favor are all affected by everyday decisions that are often related to what we call journalism ethics.

It is important to remember that journalism is an open profession meaning no license is required to be a journalist. People involved in journalism voluntarily accept professional obligations that come with it by belonging to regulatory bodies, such as Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) or Australian Press Council (APC). Journalism operates in a co-regulatory form of self-regulation where the codes are enacted by industry bodies, supplementary by legislation. Industry bodies detain the task of regulating professional conduct, which targets individuals, organizations and proprietors in order to offer a holistic regulatory framework.

For example, photojournalist Kevin Carter's photo of a starving girl trying to find food while being looked upon by a vulture. This picture won a Pulitzer Prize for this photo but there was some major ethical debate on whether Carter did the right thing.

Personally, I think Carter was unethical because he should have helped the little girl get food. I would like to think that, if I was in his situation and had witness children starving, I would have helped, but unless someone is put in that particular situation they don't know how they would react.

Professionally as a photojournalist, I think Carter acted ethically with the situation that he was put in. As a photojournalist, one should think does this moment need to be made public. In this case Carter did his job by making the world aware of the famine within Sudan. However, does this particular image capture that entire situation or just this girl's experience.

A photojournalist should consider if the subject's image is capture will it bring further harm to the them. In this case, photographing this young girl did not bring further harm to her situation because she did not even notice she was being photographed. A photojournalist should be at the least obtrusive distance as possible and this particular case it didn't matter his distance to the little girl but his distance to the food supply she was trying to reach because it was not far from them at all. Also, a photojournalist should be aware of acting with compassion and sensitivity. In this case, Carter did not act compassionately towards this young girl because he was waiting twenty minutes for the particular picture he wanted. He waited to see if the vulture was going to spread his wings for a more artistic picture. Now in Carter's case, he was mentally ill and was desensitized to the image because of every thing else he experienced in Sudan. So many people died everyday. Carter was also instructed not to touch any of the children because of disease so in this case it's keep yourself healthy and safe or help this girl with a chance of getting a disease.

This ethical issue can not be answered with one discussion or with one point of view. Ethical issue will always have a different answer for every person because some people many have other experiences that can allow them one point of view over another, people's values will always determine whether they think this issue was ethical or unethical, and until someone is put in that exact situation you will not know how you will truly act. People like to believe they would help others if they need it but if your life is on the line as well survival instinct kicks in order for you to get out of the situation alive so you can get back to your own loved ones.

Embedded with the Perpetrators

Betty McLellan's article "Embedded with the Perpetrators: A Feminist Critique of the Role of Psychotherapy in domestic and family violence"discusses how society is beginning to develop psychological explanations men can use as a justification towards their violence against women and children. She makes three points: there is a new arrogance, psychological explanations are being used, and ways to be more effects in our efforts to change the culture of violence in today's society.

The first point made is there is a new arrogance in relation to men's violence against women and children. Governments, the police, the media, the law and psychology are making no attempt to hide their relationships with perpetrators. For example, PM John Howard's view point on 'automatic shared custody' thinking it's in the best interest of the child when in reality the most common reason for the separation between the parents is a history of domestic violence or sexual abuse. 

The second point is the role of psychotherapy and the way in which psychological explanations in the service of perpetrators. McLellan's discusses Freud's development of the Oedipus Complex as a direct result for his reasons of not believing fathers were capable of doing such 'perverse' things toward their daughters. Since Freud, a stream of psychologists have used their knowledge and power and lawyers using psychologist assessments as a way to support perpetrators in court. 

One justification is Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which is the most common. For example, the trauma the individual suffered throughout childhood is the reason why he lost it and murdered his wife or that's why he sexually abused his daughter for years. Suffering from PTSD is not a justifiable reason someone can use towards their violent act. Everyone suffers some sort of trauma within their lives but they aren't going around killing or abusing people they deal with it in a reasonable manner. 

Another justification is dissociation meaning the person didn't know what they were doing. For example, he 'blacked out' and woke up with the knife in his hand. Or the justification of fragmentation meaning they were dealing with too many emotions at once. For example, a man murdered his wife. He  strangled her with a piece of steel boat cable. He was arrested and charged. However, he was found not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. The community took the man's side and felt sorry for him saying he had his reasons for doing it and he had a lot to put up with. 

The third point made are the ways to be more effects in our efforts to change the culture of violence in today's society. McLellan's says that we must be up to date on the analysis of men's violence against women. She says that we should trust the established feminist's body of knowledge. Women must never give up on the issue, take care of ourselves, and to have support networks in place if ever needed for any reason. 

Journalism Confidentiality

Journalist have an ethical obligation to protect the confidentiality of their sources, but when keeping your sources confidential when asked to reveal them by the court or parliament, a journalist can be punished with jail time or a fine. Where confidences are accepted, respect them in all circumstances. This encourages journalist to attempt to get information on the record and to engage in a process of assessment of the credibility of a source before accepting off the record information. Sometimes journalist must keep the confidence of a source in order to receive the information in the first place and sources would no longer exist if journalist made it a habit of revealing their sources.

A journalist can be charged with disobedience contempt if they do not reveal their sources when asked by the court. The journalists' code is unusual among professional ethical codes in that it offers no easy escape for the reporter pressed in court to reveal a source. Some journalist have been charged with contempt and fined for refusing to provide documents to courts when subpoenaed to do so. For example, Herald-Sun journalists Michael Harvey and Gerard McManus face jail for refusing to reveal the key source of an article that caused Government embarrassment.

Another field of contempt for journalists is from the powers of parliament at both federal and state levels. The law of contempt of parliament is aimed at preserving the smooth and fair operations of the parliament. Journalist can find themselves charged with contempt of parliament in a number of ways: publishing a comment 'reflecting' on a House, referring to parliamentary records and documents in court proceedings without permission, the 'premature' publication of a committee's proceedings or evidence, and publishing material that tends to obstruct a member of parliament in the discharge of a member's duties. However, the most common type of contempt of parliament journalist are charged with is when they reveal the inner discussions of a parliamentary committee that is bound to secrecy until its report has been tabled in the parliament.

A separate area of the law, which provides a mechanism for protecting secrets, is the action for breach of confidence. A journalist is not infrequently faced with the question of whether confidential information can be revealed in the public interest. The courts apply a three-point test to determine whether there has been a breach of confidence: the information must have a quality of confidence about it, the circumstances in which the information was imparted must have given rise to an obligation of confidentiality, and the recipient must disclose the information or use it t the detriment of someone entitled to prevent such use. Confidential information can include documents, ideas, words, and objects, but most commonly the information is sensitive financial, legal, or private matter.

The law provides a defense to breach of confidences in a limited range of circumstances. the most straightforward being that you were order by a court to disclose the confidential information. The first defense is 'just cause or excuse' meaning a confidence can be broken if it relates to a crime, but the clear requirement is that there is some overriding public interest in the confidence being broken. The second defense is fair report. The third defense is protected disclosure meaning the public interest factor involves questions of to whom the disclosure may be made. Disclosure to one class of people may be considered to be in the public interest, while disclosure to a broader class may not.

Artemus Jones

The Artemus Jones case is the most famous foundation defamation cases. A London newspaper journalist published a story about a fictitious character with the name 'Artemus Jones'. The character was described as spending time with a women who was not his wife. The newspaper was sued for defamation because a real man with the name Artemus Jones had his reputation taken into question. This is just one example of why journalist have to be careful so they are not sued with defamation. Journalist need to be make sure that when using a fake name that no one else really has the name. Journalist need to have a defense ready to protect themselves if they is a chance that the material could be considered defamatory.

Defamation is the harming or damaging of a person's reputation. It is a civil wrong. The law for defamation protect people's reputations and their 'good name'.

There are three major things necessary in order for it to be considered defamation. The first is publication. The act of publication makes something known to another or makes it accessible to another. The  plaintiff has to prove that the material in question was published to at least one person that is not them or the defendant. Journalist need to be aware of the third person rule when researching. Also, if someone republishes material that is considered defamatory, then they can be sued too even though they didn't originally publish it.

The second is the content that was published must have carried defamatory imputations. Defamatory imputations are unclear under the Defamation Act. It is anything that might damage a person's reputation, cause someone to think less of the person, hold a person up to ridicule or cause others to shun and avoid them. These are unclear because it all depends on the person who is viewing the information published and what their opinion is on how a person's reputation can be ruined. The third part is identification. A person claiming defamation will have to prove he or she can be identified in connection with the material.

Any living person can bring an action for defamation. There is a short list of who cannot be defamed. People must be alive in order to sue or be sued for defamation, but it is quite possible to be defaming a living person connected to the dead one. Groups and organizations cannot be defamed because identifying the person the defamatory material is talking about is difficult. However, corporations with less than 10 people can be defamed because identification in this case is fairly easy with only 10 people to base the defamatory material on.

The Break Up

In life there are certain situations and people that put strains on our lives and in return the stress is placed upon someone else. The movie The Break Up demonstrates the tensions that put stress on a relationship and how the relationship works out the problems. The movie stars Vince Vaughn and Jennifer Aniston and after two years of being in a relationship the tensions start to become to much for either one to handle. 

Within Vaughn and Aniston’s relationship, they have many tensions pulling on one another to the point where the string break apart. Both their characters have the tension of work that brings problems into their relationship. Aniston’s character works at a major art gallery which is run by an up tight boss. She also comes home after her long day of work and cleans their condo and cook dinner almost every night. Vaughn’s character has his own Chicago tour company which he also runs with his two other brothers. 

Also both characters have family tensions on both sides that are brought into the relationship. Aniston’s character has her brother and his singing career adds to the tensions. Vaughn’s character has one of his brothers badgering him about tour logs for the company so he does not have to do them and can spend time with his own family. He also has another brother who is very immature towards women and likes to take Vaughn’s character partying.  Even after they break up there is still the tension of who will get the condo because neither one will move out. 

Within The Break Up, the characters demonstrate that within most relationships the partners have the desire to be connected with one another and also the desire for autonomy. Aniston wants Vaughn to be more attentive and to help her with the preparation of their dinner party. Vaughn, on the other hand, wants to come home and drink a beer and watch TV. He does not care that she is asking for his help all he wants to do is be left alone. 

The characters experience tensions such as wanting stability and having the desire with some change. 

The characters display this aspect of the theory by always doing what Vaughn wants to do such as going to baseball games and playing on the couples bowling league. The desire for change on Vaughn's part is never there. His character never wants to do anything that he does not like such as going to the ballet because that is something that she loves to do. 

The movie displays everyday tensions that other couples may face in their own relationships. 

Sons of Anarchy

Sons of Anarchy is about an outlawed motorcycled club that lives in Charming, California. The main character is Jax Teller, who is the vice president of the club. Throughout the show, he struggles with trying to raise his son in a safe world and the love he has for the club his father started. The club deals with running guns, other gangs, drugs and sex. On the other hand, the most important thing to the entire club is family. 

The show first aired in 2008 and will start its sixth season this September. Kurt Sutter is the show’s creator, executive producer, writer, and director. According to Sons of Anarchy’s main page, Kurt Sutter spent most of his childhood in doors directly in front of the television. The time spent there allowed Sutter to gain the knowledge of storytelling and that violence is educational if the story is told with animated and colorful characters. Along with his work this show, he works with Paramount Studios, Warner Bros, and DreamWorks. The Los Angeles Times reports that the second season averaged 3.7 million total viewers. The Chicago Tribune gave the show three and a half stars. The Sons of Anarchy’s main webpage shows that 2,891,848 people like this show on Facebook. Netflix averaged 1,046,998 people who rated this show which gave it four and a half stars. 

The show depicts a gangster's lifestyle which makes the audience interested in watching. In particular, audiences pay close attention to the codes, or values, that the gangs live by. The gangster narratives incorporate the values, such as loyalty, honor and respect, that culture seems to forget. Along with the lifestyle, minorities are portrayed in this series and that portrayal effects audience's view about minorities throughout life. They are characterized by parts of criminals, or law enforcers, and these parts are defined by the minorities intelligence level, speech, laziness, and aggression. These stereotypical characterization gives the audience a skewed sense of minorities in general because of the negative judgements the media shows the public. This racial discrimination is characterized by the egalitarian values of Whites and their negative attitudes directed toward racial groups. 

Along with minorities represented, women are also portrayed within this series and this portrayal will effect how young audiences view women. Most of the women in this show were between twenty and thirty years of age. Women were more likely to have a blue-collared job than a white-collar. Women’s marital status, and physical characteristics, had no direct relationship when it came to their occupational role. However, Sutter loves to write strong female characters, such as Gemma Teller, played by Kately Sagal, and Tara, played by Maggie Siff. Gemma Teller is the club's president's wife who has power over the other guys in the club. Tara is Jax Teller's girlfriend and a pediatric surgeon on the show. 

Gender Stereotypes

Throughout advertising, advertisers feature traditional gender stereotypes. Theories indicate that children learn the traditional sex roles by imitating their parents, reading literature, and watching television. Children learn through observing which behaviors are accepted, or rewarded, and wrong or punished. For example, if a boy is playing with his sister's dolls, then the parents would probably correct him by informing him that boys do not play with dolls. 

Sex refers to the biology and gender is a social construction of what defines people to be male and female. The difference between men and women biologically is that women have the capability to reproduce the next generation. This was one reason why, in hunting and gathering tribes, women were put in the position to gather food, bear and nurture the children. Men were seen as the hunters because of their strengths and agility. 

In relation to children learning their roles through television, they also learn through books geared toward teaching young children how to act in school. Children's books teach social norms and acceptable behavior for society. For example, books such as Dear Dumb Diary, Dork Diaries, and Diary of a Wimpy Kid discuss how proper femininities and masculinities are constructed, challenged, and reinforced in literature. 

For men acceptable behavior in society is to be tough without female traits and women are supposed to dependent on men and concerned about their attractiveness. This relates back to the gender stereotypes that began the division of labor in the hunting and gathering societies. Men and women rarely have the same power, privilege, and status. 

Along with television and books, advertising during children's programs teaches gender differences. Binary oppositions, such as aggressive/passive and active/inactive, are used to explain the differences between girls and boys. Girls were described as being passive, happy playing house, and inactive because they were shown being at home most of the time. Boys were described as being active, playing outside, aggressive and unhappy. 

Gender stereotypes began in our earliest societal form and still exist in our society today. Gender is a social construction defining what it means to be male or female. Children learn what is acceptable in society through imitating their parents, who learned their role from society as well; watching children’s television programs and reading children’s books. Children automatically accept these roles because they do not want to go against the status quo and be seen as different.

Battles of the Sexes

Through the influence of media, sports have shaped our perceptions of the world. Traditionally, the gender characteristic people typically associate with sports is masculinity. Through the eyes of the public, sports are characterized as a male arena where manhood gets defined. Women had a hard time infiltrating that male arena because anyone who falls outside of the stereotype is deemed un-athletic. The traditional view was that women were too fragile for the physical activity that came along with playing a sport and that they would become infertile. Also, women’s sports were seen as unnatural, unfeminine, and un-American. Sports have such an influence within society that it brought attention to larger social struggles, such as gender equality. 

The civil rights movement fought for equality before the law, but the movement did not include equality associated with women because they were seen in the eyes of the people as a minority. In 1967, the National Organization for Women worked with President Johnson on clarification for the Civil Right Act of 1964. The organization attracted many women to the cause, including two congresswomen. Congresswomen Patsy T. Mink and Edith Green drafted Title IX. Title IX was passed on June 23, 1972.

Title IX states that “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” Even with Title IX being passed, women were still fighting for equal rights and opportunities within the sports world because there were institutions that were not complying with the regulations.

The most influential person who fought for equality rights in sports was Billie Jean King. Billie Jean King won six Wimbledon singles, four U.S. Open titles and was ranked number one in the world for five years. Even though she accomplished all these titles, King is remembered most for her victory over a man. King played against Bobby Riggs, who was a Wimbledon champion as well. Bobby Riggs believed that women’s tennis was inferior to the men’s. On September 20, 1973, King and Riggs faced off in a match known as the “Battle of the Sexes”, which was televised worldwide and had 50 million viewers. Newspapers and magazines were celebrating her win over Riggs. 

This match was very important because it took place a year after Title IX was passed and proved to the world that women’s sports deserved respect. the tennis match between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs because it was in that moment that King proved to the world that women athletes needed the respect they deserve. However, women athletes in today’s media are still underrepresented and on the occasion they are reported on it pertains to their physical appearance and other issues, instead of their performance.