Journal #2: Pregnant $$

Journal #2: Paying Girls Not to Get Pregnant, July 23, 2009 by Carin Ford (higheredmorning.com)
The University of North Carolina’s come up with an unusual incentive in hopes of encouraging teen girls not to get pregnant. In an attempt to reduce the number of teen pregnancies, UNC at Greensboro is providing classes in abstinence and the use of contraceptives to girls ages 12 to 18 — and paying them a dollar a day not to get pregnant. Girls who attend the 90-minute weekly meetings – and who don’t get pregnant – collect $7 at the end of each week. The money is put aside and can be collected when the girls enter college. But is it ethical to pay girls not to have babies? Or is this a case of desperate times calling for desperate measures? The teen birth rate is on the rise these past two years, with 7.2 pregnancies for every 1,000 teenage girls. Although a handful of girls enrolled in College Bound Sisters have gotten pregnant since it began more than 10 years ago, there are also success stories. This fall, in fact, four graduates will begin college with the help of the money – in some cases, $3,000 – they’ve earned in the program.
What do you think? Is this a good idea to pay girls to avoid becoming pregnant to reduce the teen birth rate? Bonus points are offered if you take the time to look up intrinsic versus extrinsic motivation and think about those ideas.

This is the perfect example of a Intrinsic versus Extrinsic Motivation case. Is this really a good idea? In my opinion, when was the last time you met a pregnant teen who wanted to get pregnant? No teens wants to have a baby, it changes their lives forever. Children are for responsible adult, and having a baby at sixteen is not very responsible.

So my question is: How is paying them going to change anything? Sure, money is good and not getting pregnant for it is a plus. But most likely the teen did not want to have a baby before the money was offered. So how is the money changing anything?

Sex is still sex. Teens still want to have sex. And while a teen is about to have sex , is money promised in the future really going to stop them from having pleasure at the moment?
Using Extrinsic Motivation may be helpful for some cases, but not in this one. Dangling an award is not good enough, when it comes to giving up sex.

How would using Intrinsic Motivation differ? For one, the goals and rewards are meaningful. If you teach the teen the difference between children from teenager parents and adult parents, you are showing them a true award. Statistics show if they wait, their child, love of their life, will have a healthier environment and have a happier, brighter future. Is this not something that will be etched into their lives forever? A human beings life's should have more weight then money.

Don't get me wrong, for the teens that were never going to get pregnant in the first place, this money is great. I would love some cash for having no baby.

Teenagers are always right, in their own minds. Nobody can tell them different, not teachers, and defiantly not parents. So when you give them the facts, the stories, and you let them form conclusions, emotions, and experiences on their own..they are going to get it. And accept it, because it is their own conclusion.

It would be nice if we could all believe that everybody waits until marriage to have sex. But we can't be ignorant and believe that. So instead of pounding it in their heads, and telling them the answer is "no sex", we should be showing them all the different options for safe sex. All the different protections against pregnancy, and include absence in the lessons. Let the teenager decide and create their own decision. If the lessons are informative, strong, and on their level, I believe there will be a more positive result from the teenagers, then an adult telling them there is only one way.

The money is a great reward for those who decide to wait to have children, and be responsible about their choices, but at the same time, maybe it would be more productive to change the focus and the way we look at the reward. The money is the smallest reward we can be telling these teens about.

Journal #1: The Dirty Science of Magazines

Journal #1: Maxim. Cosmo. Playboy. Playgirl. Elle. Men’s Health. Vogue. These magazines spend millions of dollars researching the male/female mind so that they can market to it…to you. How well do you think that they understand the male or female psyche? Do you think that you fit in the average demographic to which they are marketing? Why or why not?

I believe these magazines do a great job marketing to male/female minds. They spend millions of dollars researching and they succeed by making money back. I believe when these magazine are researching female/mind, they are focusing on the "wants."

Let face it, when a man is at the convenient store, and a glossy half-naked bunny catches their eye, it is all want. And for a small fee, the man can take home that bunny.

The same goes for a woman's want. I went to vogue.com, and I am automatically bribed with an "exclusive red bag", it looks so good and for only a years subscription, I can have this "exclusive red bag." That flashy red bag catches the women's eye, the word "exclusive" pulls her in, and the fact it is part of a sale? deal.

So what is it that playboy.com is flashing, in order to sell magazines? Boobs. Right on the home page, I am bombarded with breast. This really isn't as appealing to me personally, but Vogue has done their research for me and so they choose to use bag.

But women must have more "wants" then just bags and fashion, and this is where Playgirl steps in. Playgirl has spent their millions of "research dollars" on what women find sexually attractive, much like what Playboy does for men. When entering the Playgirl website, the homepage is a bit more reserved then Playboy (I'm guessing the rest of the website is less then shy). The opening page lures a women in by showing bare the upper bodies of men. See a connection? The exact same bait that Playboy is using, but with the opposite sex.

Magazines like Playgirl, Vogue, and Elle cater to the wants of a females mind. Each magazine caters to a different kind of want. Not every woman finds interest in Playgirl, Vogue or Elle, every woman is different. But the research tries to represent women as a whole. By reading a magazine, I'm sure all my wants are not filled, and probably very little of my needs, but I've been entertained. And Americans WANT to entertained.

I've also noticed women's magazines have a lot more celebrity related articles and focuses. This must mean, magazines have found that women want gossip. For most men, the knowledge of who's dating who in Hollywood is more like torture than pleasure.

Which is why men love car magazines. It's those types of things, most women just don't get it. Why look at pictures of shiny fast metal? Because it's his want. Which is why magazines like Men's Health, focus on more manly things, like working out, getting buff, and of course sex. On the cover of a Men's Health magazine, titles are read saying things like "The truth about exercising machines", "go beyond bacon", "get rid of that gut" and 30-red hot sex tips." Male and female magazines seems to always comes back to one thing- sex. So what are those researching saying about us?

I believe these magazine have researched what the mind of a male/female wants and then they cater to it. Is it exercising routines, recipes, flirting technique's, latest fashions, best deals, gossip, sport legends, sex tricks, shiny cars, cash filled entertainment, makeup and hair tips? Yes, yes it is.